ititmmH 



lUiin'iHHiii 



lUltlllli 



ij(!!j;ii;HU,Uiiiu,i!;ii;!!i;, :,;;;:; 



lUtti: 






kit .i.; : :; ?;j!* li.i'i ■ 






;^:.i. .; , 

[ I ■ I ; 1 i ? . • > • ( - ♦ W 
h i » • ^ • ' * ^ ' ' ' -I 



I t r ' ' ' 






mmi 







i-iwarimiKml 




Class ->-P %'Zj^OO 
Book ^(fi 



PRESENTED BY 




T 



%m 



PETER LOMBARD 

AND THE 

SACRAMENTAL 
SYSTEM 



ELIZABETH FRANCES ROGERS, M.A. 



NEW YORK 
1917 



'-:,%:-■'' 'n^mK^mpm^m^^ 



/ 

PETER LOMBARD AND 

THE SACRAMENTAL 

SYSTEM 



ELIZABETH FRANCES ROGERS, M.A. l^JjJ 



SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT 
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE 
DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY, 
IN THE FACULTY OF POLITICAL 
SCIENCE, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 




NEW YORK 
1917 



^ 



^,.00 



-^h 



Copyright, 19 17. by 
ELIZABETH FRANCES ROGERS 



.Gift 
The Uni-verfitty 

m 24 win 



LC Control Number 




tmp96 028035 



TO MY FATHER 
PROFESSOR ROBERT WILLIAM ROGERS 



CONTENTS 

CHAP. PAGE 

Preface vii 

I. The Conception of Sacrament in the Early Fathers i 

II. The Formulation of the Definition of Sacrament. . 25 

III. The Eucharistic Controversy 30 

IV. Efforts After Codification 39 

V. Predecessors of the Lombard 46 

VI. Peter Lombard and His Text-Book 58 

Appendix 

Translation of Book IV, Distinctions I-XXVI, of 
the Quatuor Libri Sententiarum of Peter the 

Lombard 79 

Bibliography 247 



PREFACE 

Erasmus once complained that there were as many commen- 
taries on Peter Lombard's "Sentences" as there were theologians. 
But here is a commentary by one who is not even a theologian 
but only a student of history. It is fortunate that Erasmus — 
and the Lombard himself — did not live to see this evil day. 

This is not work which would have won the coveted degree 
of "Bachalarius Sententiarius" in a medieval university — I can 
only lay claim to have won to an interest in the subject equal to 
that of most of those medieval bachelors. My first interest in 
Medieval Church History I owe to my college professor, Annie 
Heloise Abel, and my interest in this particular phase of it to 
Seminars on the Medieval Church with Professor Shotwell at 
Columbia. The subject was assigned to me — I should never have 
had the courage to venture on it otherwise — and as I finish my 
study of it, I can only say in the Lombard's own words, "If any- 
one can explain it better, I am not envious." 

I have had courtesies in many libraries, but I wish especially 
to speak gratefully of the Bodleian Library in Oxford, of the 
Library of Columbia University, and of that of Union Theolog- 
ical Seminary. I am particularly indebted to Professor Rockwell 
of Union Seminary for his invaluable help and training in bibli- 
ography. 

I wish here to express my gratitude to Professor Shotwell 
for the most interesting work in the Social History of the Middle 
Ages; to Professor Woker of the University of Bern, "ein ge- 
borener Lehrer, der glaubt dass jeder Student ein Genie ist," as a 
colleague said of him, for fascinating lectures on the Political 
History of medieval times, and for kindness to a foreigner; and 
to Professor Annie Heloise Abel, now of Smith College, not only 
for inspiring teaching in my undergraduate days, but for con- 
stant interest, friendship and encouragement in my graduate 
study. Elizabeth F. Rogers. 

Madison, New Jersey, 

January 2, 19 17. 



CHAPTER I 

The Conception of Sacrament in the Early Fathers 

One should not expect to find a definition of the sacraments, 
much less a developed sacramental system in the writings of the 
early Church.^ In the history of religion, cult frequently develops 
before dogma. It is in many instances a determining element in 
the formulation of doctrine, even where the doctrine, on the face 
of it, seems to furnish the very basis for the cult. In the Chris- 
tian Church we find a long development of the form of worship, 
and the beginnings of formal liturgy, before we come to any dis- 
cussion of the meaning of these ceremonies. 

It is controversy which brings precision in people's ideas. 
In the early Church, there were the long struggles with the pagans, 
which we see reflected in the apologetic literature of the time, and 
then the innumerable controversies over the heresies which arose 
in the Church itself, and called forth the formulation of the ortho- 
dox belief. In the "Apologies" against the pagans, and in the 
"Defences" against Christian heretics, we may look for the be- 
ginnings of that long and slow development of the doctrine of the 
sacraments, which only attained its final form more than a thou- 
sand years later in the writings of the Scholastic theologians. 

To trace this development is extremely difficult because the 
idea of sacrament matures in silence while other subjects are 
monopolizing discussion. The earlier Fathers are far more con- 
cerned with the great doctrines of faith than with the sacraments. 
They are discussing the resurrection of the Lord and its bearing 
upon the resurrection of believers. They are laboring to convince 



^ For obvious reasons this study in the history of the medieval church does 
not go into the problems of the interpretation of New Testament texts or that 
of the conception of sacrament held in the apostolic age; for such considerations 
carry one into quite a different field, that of New Testament exegesis and com- 
parative religion. 



2 PETER LOMBARD 

unbelievers, to establish the wavering, to stimulate love and good 
works. It is among the multifarious interests of the church that 
here and there a spark is struck with some light upon the sacra- 
ments. It is, however, fascinatingly interesting to see how the 
spark kindles larger masses of material, and to observe the grow- 
ing flame. 

It has seemed well worth while to single out from the writ- 
ings which are so multiform, and so rich, the passages which relate 
to the sacraments, and to set them down, closely following a 
chronological order. It will be observed that the passages quoted 
are much longer in the earlier than in the later writers. The rea- 
son is that the earlier Christians give only hints, suggestions, allu- 
sions to the sacraments, and to make these clear we must have 
before us the whole of the context. Later, as the minds of men 
were more clearly focussed upon the sacraments, and definitions 
of them had become matter of controversy the citations are brief, 
specific and on that account at times arid. 

JUSTIN MARTYR (c. II4-C. 1 65) 

In the literature of Apology, the earliest detailed and from 
many points of view the most interesting reference to the Chris- 
tian cult is that of Justin Martyr, who died A. D. 165. He gives 
a picture of the worship, including a description of its central 
ceremony, the celebration of the Eucharist, which later apologists 
did not dare to do owing to the persecutions and the resultant 
Discipline of the Secret.^ But it is significant of the general 
character of the early Christian doctrine, that one finds in the long 
exposition of Justin almost no light upon the doctrines involved. 
He does not define sacraments. Baptism and the Eucharist, it is 
true, do stand out very clearly as essential to Christianity; but 
there is an equal emphasis upon prayer. This does not mean that 
Justin lacked the conception of sacrament. He had been too 



^ The obligation to keep secret from the pagans and the unbaptized, the 
formula of the three-fold name, the Creed, and the Lord's Prayer. This was a 
following of the pagan mysteries, and is akin to the scruple among primitive 
peoples, against revealing the knowledge of a powerful name. Cf . Bonwetsch. 



THE EARLY FATHERS 3 

familiar with the Mysteries for that. For, although he does not 

use any special term for the sacraments, he refers to their effects 

in language which implies an acquaintance with the mystery rites. ^ 

We can see an instance of this in his description of Baptism. 

*'I will also relate the manner in which we dedicated ourselves 
to God when we had been made new through Christ. ... As many 
as are persuaded and believe that what we teach and say is true, and 
undertake to be able to live accordingly, are instructed to pray and 
to entreat God with fasting, for the remission of their sins that are 
past, we praying and fasting with them. Then they are brought by 
us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in 
which we were ourselves regenerated.^ For, in the name of God, the 
Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, 
and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water.^ 
. . . And this washing is called illumination, because they who 
learn these things are illuminated in their understandings. . . . " * 

His appreciation of the analogy to the mystery rites is inter- 
esting, but he draws no doctrinal conclusions .which would make 
clearer the kind of ceremony employed. 

"And the devils, indeed, having heard this washing published 
by the prophet, instigated those who enter their temples, and are 
about to approach them with libations and burnt-offerings, also to 
sprinkle themselves ; and they cause them also to wash themselves 
entirely, as they depart [from the sacrifice], before they enter into 
the shrines in which images are set."^ 

^ It is not hereby implied that the early Christians confused sacraments with 
mysteries. They regarded these rites as instituted by Christ and loathed those 
of the heathen. The modern view that mysteries influenced the development of 
sacraments is right, but the Christians of A. D, 150 were ignorant of this. 

^"Eireira dyoprai y0' ijfjLQv evda vdup iffri^ Kal rpb-rrov dvayevpi^creuSj 6v Kal ijixeh 
avTol dveyevvi^drjfjLep^ avayevvdvTai. 

3 First Apology, c. LXL 

* Ibid. KaXerrat bk tovto to Xovrpbv (puTKr/xdi^ ws (fxaTi^oixhiov ttjv dLOLPOiav tQv 
Tavra fxapdapbpriav. 

This word "illumination" or "enlightenment" is borrowed straight from 
the Greek mysteries, and comes to be the constant technical term. See Hatch, 
The Influence of Greek Ideas and Usages upon the Christian Church, p. 295. 
Also Hamack, "History of Dogma," vol. I, pp. 207-8. German Edition, vol. I, 
pp. 229-230. 

5 Ibid. c. LXII. 



4 PETER LOMBARD 

To Justin we are indebted for the first description of the cele- 
bration of the Eucharist following Baptism in the early Church. 
The service begins with prayers for the illuminated person and 
for the others, already members of the Christian community. 

"Having ended the prayers, we salute one another with a kiss. 
There is then brought to the president of the brethren bread and a 
cup of wine mixed with water ; and he tajcing them, gives praise 
and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the 
Son and of the Holy Ghost, and offers thanks at considerable length 
for our being counted worthy to receive these things at his hands. 
And when he has concluded the prayers and thanksgivings, all the 
people express their assent by saying Amen. . . . And when the 
president has given thanks, and all the people have expressed their 
assent, those who are called by us deacons give to each of those pres- 
ent to partake of the bread and wine mixed with water over which 
the thanksgiving was pronounced, and to those who are absent they 
carry away a portion.^ 

"And this food is called among us Bvxaptarla [the Eucharist], 
of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that 
the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with 
the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, 
and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common 
bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner 
as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word 
of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have 
we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of his 
word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nour- 
ished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh." ^ . . . 

Here again he sees the resemblance to the sacred meals of the 
mysteries. 

"Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of 



1 Ibid. c. LXV. 

Called the Eulogia — ^it was also sent by the bishops, notably those of Rome, 
to their daughter churches, and to foreign bishops and churches, as a symbol of 
Christian love and brotherhood. The practice seems to have been universal, 
but tended to degenerate into irreverence and superstition, and was forbidden 
by the Council of Laodicaea, A. D. 365. 

2 Ibid. C. LXVI. . . . Oi5 yhp <bs Koivbv dftrov oid^ KoivbvwSfia TavraXafJi^dpoiMv. . . . 



THE EARLY FATHERS 5 

Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread 
and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic 
rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn." ^ 

Upon the whole, then, the earliest detailed description of the 
Christian worship which comes to us from the sub-apostolic age, 
shows the existence and appreciation of sacramental religion. 

According to Justin the Christian form of worship is a mys- 
tery in the sense of the mysteries of Mithras or Eleusis. That is, 
its rites themselves convey the grace of God. In baptism, one is 
"illuminated," and in the Eucharist one does not receive ''com- 
mon bread and common drink" but a miraculous and divine nour- 
ishment. Justin does not elaborate the exact operation of the 
divine grace in either case, but the general sense is clear. The full 
force of his description can be seen only when one has in mind the 
other mysteries, which he was combatting, but which none the less 
furnished the mould of his thought. 

From the description which Justin offers it is clear that this 
sense of the sacramental in the Christian religion was not simply 
that of an author who had himself been saturated in the pagan 
atmosphere, but was also the outlook of the Christians in the com- 
munities he describes. For instance, the attitude of the congrega- 
tion toward the ''blessed bread," v^hich is sent to the absent as well 
as partaken of by those present, indicates a feeling for the sacra- 
mental grace imparted through the elements. 

Although therefore there is no definite conception of sacra- 
ment as a whole and no definition of its working, the implications 
from this description are clear enough. The cult is sacramental, 
even when viewed from the angle of one trained as a pagan. 

IREN.EUS ( C. 190) 

The next important text to which we turn is naturally that 
of Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons in France, in the last quarter of the 
second century. He is the first of the Fathers to review in a 
comprehensive way the heretical doctrines into which Christianity 



1 Ibid. c. LXVI. 



6 PETER LOMBARD 

seemed to be dissolving, and to state the case of orthodoxy with 
incisive vigor. His famous work "Against Heresies," or "A 
Refutation and Subversion of Knowledge falsely so called," not 
only summarizes the chief heresies which were then threatening 
the speculative Christian world, but also, by way of refutation, a 
somewhat elaborate statement of the bases of the Catholic teach- 
ing. So that Irenaeus stands as a prime source for the early his- 
tory of Catholicism. 

It is therefore significant that when one turns to this state- 
ment of Christian teaching and practice, one finds no developed 
statement of the working of the sacraments. Such references as 
there are, are incidental and their meaning is to be appreciated 
mainly by a study of the context. 

It is as sacrifice rather than as sacrament in the technical sense 
of this word, that Irenseus develops his discussion of the Euchar- 
ist.-^ This is, of course, an aspect of the Eucharist which is almost 
as important as that of sacrament and runs parallel to it through- 
out all its history. The sacrifice of the Mass is the setting for the 
sacrament of the Eucharist. The problem of transubstantiation, 
that supreme problem of medieval and modern controversy, has 
its roots in the conceptions of sacrifice as well as in those of sacra- 
ment. The controversies as to the working of the sacrament, as 
to whether the priest at the altar repeats the real sacrifice of Christ 
or not — these and many other related dogmas carry one over 
rather to the field of sacrifice than to that of sacramental com- 
munion. So that the discussions of the early Fathers concerning 
the Christian sacrifice help, as well, to lay the basis for a definition 
of sacrament. But they do little more. For they naturally link 
up with the priesthood and temple of the Old Testament, and 
attempt either to draw from the "law and the prophets" sugges- 



^ The Western Church came, in time, to apply the term sacrifice almost 
exclusively to the one "sacrifice of the altar," the Mass; by which they meant 
the total ceremony of which the eucharistic communion or sacrament was only a 
part. But the conception of sacrifice in Christian worship naturally transcends 
these technical boundaries. It is, in the nature of the case, a wider term than 
sacrament. 



THE EARLY FATHERS 7 

tions for the conduct of the Christian community/ or to show 
the essential justification for Christian practices as a modifica- 
tion of the rites of the old dispensation. 

Sacrifices and oblations are required of the Christian as they 
had been of the Jew. "The class of oblations in general has not 
been set aside; for there were both oblations there [among the 
Jews], and there are oblations here [among the Christians]. 
Sacrifices there were among the people; sacrifices there are, too, 
in the Church: but the kind has been changed, inasmuch as the 
offering is now made, not by slaves, but by freemen."^ 

In his discussion of the working of this Christian sacrifice, 
Irenaeus comes very near a definition of sacrament in the passage 
in which he defends the doctrine of the resurrection of the body. 
The Eucharist is a medium of divine grace since the body that is 
nourished with it does not go to corruption but is to partake of 
eternal life. The conception of sacrament is implied if not 
directly expressed. 

''How can they say that the flesh, which is nourished with the 
body of the Lord and with his blood, goes to corruption, and does 
not partake of life? Let them, therefore, either alter their opinion, 
or cease from offering the things just mentioned. But our opinion is 
in accordance with the Eucharist, and the Eucharist in turn estab- 
lishes our opinion. For we offer to him his own, announcing con- 
sistently the fellowship and union of the flesh and Spirit. For as the 
bread, which is produced from the earth, when it receives the invo- 
cation of God, is no longer common bread, but the Eucharist, con- 
sisting of two realities, earthly and heavenly^ ; so also our bodies, 
when they receive the Eucharist, are no longer corruptible, having 
the hope of the resurrection to eternity." * 

1 As in Clement's First Epistle to the Corinthians. 

2 Contra Haereses. iv. XVIII. 2. 

Et non genus oblationum reprobatum est; oblationes enim et illic, obla- 
tiones autem et hie : sacrificia in populo, sacrificia in Ecclesia : sed species immu- 
tata est tantum, quippe cum jam non a servis, sed a Hbris offeratur. 

2 Ibid. iv. XVIII. 5. . . 'Us . . . dirb yijs dpros irpoffXa/n^avd/jLevos tt}v eKK\r}<riv 
rod deoVj oi/K^ri Koivbs dproi iarlp^ dXX' eixo-ptcTTiaj ix 5^o irpayp-droov crvveaTrjKViaj ewtyeiov 
re Kai oipaviov, 

4 Ibid. iv. XVIII. 5. 



8 PETER LOMBARD 

More specific reference to the sacramental element in the 
Christian sacrifice occurs in another passage dealing with the same 
theme. Defending his doctrine of the "salvation of the flesh," ^ 
Irenseus argues : 

"But if this indeed do not attain salvation, then neither did the 
Lord redeem us with his blood, nor is the cup of the Eucharist the 
communion of his blood, nor the bread which we break the com- 
munion of his body. . . . And as we are his members, we are also 
nourished by means of the creation (and he himself grants the crea- 
tion to us, for he causes his sun to rise, and sends rain when he 
wills). He has acknowledged the cup (which is a part of the crea- 
tion) as his own blood, from which he bedews our blood; and the 
bread (also a part of the creation) he has established as his own 
body, from which he gives increase to our bodies.^ 

"When, therefore, the mingled cup and the manufactured bread 
receives the Word of God, and the Eucharist becomes the body 
of Christ,^ from which things our flesh is increased and supported, 
how can they aflirm that the flesh is incapable of receiving the gift 
of God, which is life eternal, which [flesh] is nourished from the 
body and blood of the Lord, and is a member of him?" ^ 

In these scattered references to the Eucharist, incidental to 
his discussion of the Resurrection, we can see the line of thought 
pursued by Irenaeus concerning that element of the sacrifice which 
is also sacrament, namely the nature of the communion. It is 
clear that although there is no definition of sacrament, and that 
the conception is so embedded in that of sacrifice as to be practi- 
cally obscured from view, the sacrament is there as genuinely as 
though it had been defined in detail. 

There is only one passage which at all gives Irenaeus' view 
of baptism: 

"It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering 
from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [it served] 



ilbid. V. II. 2. 

^ Ibid. V. II. 3. rb KCKpafiivop iroTi^piop, Kal 6 yeyovCis &pTos ^TtS^x*''"^' ''^^^ \6yov 
Tov deov^ Kal ylverai ij evxapiCTia aw/xa XpurTOv. 
3 Ibid. V. II. 3. 



THE EARLY FATHERS 9 

as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made 
clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, 
from our old transgressions; being spiritually regenerated as new- 
born babes, even as the Lord has declared: 'Except a man be bom 
again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the king- 
dom of heaven.' " ^ 

We are now come to the end of our review of the contribu- 
tions of Irenaeus to the sacramental system, and there needs only 
to point to the difference between him and his forerunner Justin 
Martyr. The contrast between the two men is a contrast of back- 
ground. The analogies which Justin finds are to the "sacred 
meals of the mysteries," to ''the mysteries of Mithras," to "mys- 
tic rites," and his language is full of allusions to "sacred meals," 
to the "initiated" or to "incantations." The background is unmis- 
takably Greek. This is significant and it could not be without 
influence upon the man's whole thinking and upon its outcome in 
dogma. To all this Irenaeus presents a vivid contrast. His dis- 
cussion is freighted with the imagery, the phraseology, and the 
theological conceptions of the Old Testament. It is the "law and 
the prophets," "the sacrifices" of the Jewish dispensation, "the 
lepers," — all of them and many more from this single source, and 
the analogies and illustrations are of the same mould. With Ire- 
naeus it is not Mithras but Naaman, who points his moral. Herein 
lies the explanation of many of the differences in the conclusions 
of the two men. As we go forward now to Latin instead of Greek 
we shall do well to bear in mind the differences between Justin 
and Irenaeus, the while that we carry forward the results of their 
thinking and disputing upon the sacramental system. 

TERTULLIAN (c. I50 Or l6o-220 Or 240) 

The Latin tongue is singularly lacking in the terminology 
either of philosophy or of religion, a characteristic which corre- 
sponds, so it has often been claimed, with the temper of the Roman 
people as exhibited in their history. When the first Latin Father, 
Tertullian, at the opening of the third century attempted to frame 

1 Fragments. XXXIV. 



lo PETER LOMBARD 

the conceptions of Christian theology in Latin he was unable to 
translate the Greek literally since the languages had no exact par- 
allels, and so he boldly adapted terms, which were formerly used 
in a different connection, to the uses of Christian theology. In 
the legal Latin familiar to a man trained, as Tertullian was, in 
the Roman law, the word sacramentum had several different 
meanings. In the first place it meant the sum which the two 
parties to a suit deposited — so-called perhaps because it was 
deposited in a sacred place. ^ Then, by metonymy, it meant a civil 
suit or process. Finally, it was the military oath of allegiance, 
and so any solemn obligation. 

Tertullian uses this term in various ways.^ In the first place 
we have the literal application of it as he draws a parallel be- 
tween the neoph3rte's promises on entering the Church by baptism 
and the soldier's oath of allegiance. The Christian, like the sol- 
dier, must be faithful and obedient even to death, for "Who 
wished this fatal issue to his soldier, but he who sealed him by 
such an oath?" ^ The military life, then, is incompatible with 
that of the Christian, for ''there is no agreement between the 
divine and the human sacrament." * 

In the second place, Tertullian chooses sacramentum as a 
parallel to the Greek theological term fivaTi]pLOi^ a mystery or 
secret doctrine. In the New Testament it means a divine secret, 
something above human intelligence.^ Tertullian uses it in this 



^ Or perhaps so-called because the money deposited by the losing party 
was used for religious purposes, especially for the sacra publica (divine worship). 

2 See also Reville, Albert, Du sens du mot "sacramentum" dans Tertullien. 
Paris — Ecole pratique des hautes etudes — Section des Sciences religieuses. 
Etudes de critique et d'histoire. v. I. pp. 195-204. 

3 Scorp. 4. Quis hunc militi suo exitum voluit, nisi qui tali eum sacramento 
consignavit. 

* De Idol. 19. Non convenit sacramento divino et humano. 

This tract of Tertullian's, as also the De Spectaculis, affords an interesting 
glance into the author's mind. No less than his hatred of heathen religion is his 
hatred of heathen art and culture. The teaching of literature he thinks incom- 
patible with the Christian profession, and to him the well-spring and stimulus of 
Art is lust. 

6 Matt. 13, II. 



/ 

THE EARLY FATHERS ii 

sense when he speaks of a sister who "converses with angels 
and sometimes even with the Lord; she both sees and hears 
mysterious communications.'' -^ In another place he speaks of 
fasting as an aid to this ''recognition of mysterious communica- 
tions.'' ^ 

In addition to these two uses of the word, however, Ter- 
tullian seems as well to use ''sacrament" in the sense to which we 
are accustomed, for he speaks of the "sacrament of baptism"^ 
and of the "sacrament of the Eucharist." 

Of the Eucharist he gives only a short description : 

"We take also, in congregations before day-break, and from 
the hand of none but the presidents,^ the sacraments of the Euchar- 
ist, which the Lord hath commanded to be eaten at meal-times, and 
enjoined to be taken by all alike." ^ 

From Tertullian there seems much less to be learned con- 
cerning the Eucharist than of Baptism. There is discernible a 
growing reverence concerning the elements, witnessed, for ex- 
ample, by the scrupulous care to prevent even a drop or a crumb 
from falling to the ground.^ Beside this it should, perhaps, be 



^ De Anima. 9. Conversatur cum angelis, aliquando etiam cum Domino, 
et videt et audit sacramenta. 

2 De Jejuniis. 7. Verum etiam sacramentorum agnitionem jejunia de Deo 
merebuntur. 

It might be queried why Tertullian chose sacramentum to translate iwar-fjputv. 
It would seem that the parallel word in Latin, taken directly from the Greek, 
mysterium, could have been better used — its meanings and uses were the same. 
In the next century Ambrose used it of the Lord's Supper. {Comment, in I Cor. 
II, 27 — Mysterium celebrat.) In the plural, the Latin, as the Greek, meant the 
pagan "mysteries," but the singular had the more general meaning. 

There was also the Latinized Greek word symbolum, which might have been 
used. In the middle of the third century, symbolum was used of the formula of 
baptism: the "symbol of the Trinity" [Ep. Firmil. ad Cypr. 11]; the "symbol in 
which we baptize" [Ep. S. Cypriani ad Magnum 7 — Eodem Symbolo quo et 
nos baptizare]. This formula grew into the Roman Creed, and Rufinus, c. 
400, called it the "symbol of the apostles." [Comment, in Symbolum Apostolo- 
rum.] 

^ De Bapt. 9. In baptismi sacramento. 

^ Nee de aHorum manu quam praesidentium. 

° De Corona. 3. 



12 PETER LOMBARD 

noted that in Tertullian's day another evidence of growing rever- 
ence for the elements is to be discerned. In the passage just 
quoted it is provided that these are to be received "from the hand 
of none but the presidents," whereas in the time of Justin the 
elements were blessed by the president and then by him delivered 
to the deacons who, in their turn, passed them on to the faithful. 
They are now, in other words, to pass direct from the president, 
and are thus less likely to fall or suffer any other accident. The 
ritual develops to such a point the prohibitions attached to the 
sacramental act as to indicate a distinct growth in consciousness 
of its importance. Yet when TertuUian develops his doctrine in 
words carefully weighed there is no sign of excessive reverence, 
much less of superstition. Thus he speaks of the bread as the 
figure of his body,^ and as representing his body.^ 

To baptism, however, TertuUian devotes an entire treatise, 
which also gives us much of his general conception of sacraments. 

''All waters, therefore, . . . do, after invocation of God, 
attain the sacramental power of sanctification ; for the Spirit imme- 
diately supervenes from the heavens, and rests over the waters, sanc- 
tifying them from himself, and being thus sanctified, they imbibe 
at the same time the power of sanctifying." ^ 

"It is not to be doubted that God has made the material sub- 
stance which he has disposed throughout all his products and works, 
obeying him also in his own peculiar sacraments; that the material 
substance which governs terrestrial life acts as agent likewise in the 
celestial. . . . " ^ 

In the water "we are cleansed and prepared for the Holy 
Spirit." 

"Thus, too, does the angel, the witness of baptism, 'make the 



^ ^ Figura corporis. Adv. Marcion. III. 19. 

2 Panem quo ipsum corpus suum representat. Ibid. I. 14. 

3 De Bapt. 3. Licet eo plenius docerem non esse dubitandum, si materiam, 
quam in omnibus rebus et operibus suis Deus disposuit, etiam in sacramentis 
propriis parere fecit; si quae vitam terrenam gubernat, et in coelesti procurat. 

* De Bapt. 4^ Ita de Sancto sanctificata natura aquarum, et ipsa sanctifi- 
care concepit. 



THE EARLY FATHERS 13 

paths straight' for the Holy Spirit, who is about to come upon us, 
by the washing away of sins, which faith, sealed in (the name of) 
the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, obtains. . . . More- 
over, after the pledging both of the attestation of faith and the 
promise of salvation under 'three witnesses,' there is added, of 
necessity, mention of the Church; inasmuch as, wherever there are 
three, (that is, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,) there is 
the Church, which is a body of three.^ . . . After this, when we 
have issued from the font, we are thoroughly anointed with a blessed 
unction. . . . The unction runs carnally, (i.e., on the body,) 
but profits spiritually; in the same way as the act of baptism itself 
too is carnal, in that we are plunged into water, but the effect 
spiritual, in that we are freed from sins.^ . . . 

'Tn the next place the hand is laid on us, invoking and inviting 
the Holy Spirit through benediction." ^ 

Clause after clause of these passages show Tertullian's 
appreciation of the sacramental principle. ''All waters, . . . 
after invocation of God attain the sacramental power of sancti- 
fication." The waters are sanctified by the Spirit and at the same 
time imbibe the power of sanctifying those who shall be baptized 
in them.* He emphasizes the distinction between the simple cere- 
mony of baptism, and its spiritual significance. "The act of bap- 
tism itself ... is carnal, in that we are plunged into water, 
but the effect spiritual, in that we are freed from sins. . . . " ^ 
So TertuUian not only gives the word sacrament but even, when 
one analyzes closely the thought in this extract, we see in it a fore- 
shadowing of the real definition. A part of his great work in this 
line we shall see influenced Cyprian to a marked degree, and espe- 
cially Cyprian's uses of the word sacramentum. 

CYPRIAN (200-258)^ 
Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage in the middle of the third cen- 



1 De Bapt. 6. 

2 De Bapt. 7. Quomodo et ipsius baptismi carnalis actus, quod in aqua 
mergimur; spiritalis eflPectus, quod delictis liberamur. 

3 De Bapt. 8. * ^e Bapt. 4. ^ De Bapt. 7. 

fi See also, Edward White Benson, Cyprian, his Life, his Times, his Work, 
London, 1897, especially pp. 331, ff. 



14 PETER LOMBARD 

tury, puts a personal stamp on his work, but borrows much from 
Tertullian, whose tractates he read assiduously.^ "Cyprian did 
little more in literature than to adapt the style of Tertullian. 
. Intellectually Tertullian was an originator, Cyprian a 
populariser." Nearly all his uses of the word sacrament can be 
paralleled in Tertullian. The bent of his mind was more practical 
than speculative, and so it is not surprising that he used words 
only in the signification that usage had already given them.^ In 
this, he is in marked contrast to Tertullian, with his bold adapta- 
tion of terms. 

It is interesting therefore to see that this first great student 
of Tertullian does not fasten upon any one of the various sig- 
nifications attached to the term sacrament by Tertullian, but uses 
it in a broad, often extremely vague sense, to convey the general 
sense of what we to-day mean by sacrament. The unity of the 
Church is a sacrament,^ and anyone who departs from the one 
church impugns "the sacrament of the divine tradition." ^ In 
his treatise on the Lord's prayer, he says, "But to us, beloved 
brethren, besides the hours of prayer observed of old, both the 
times and sacraments of praying have now increased." ^ 

As in Tertullian, sacr amentum is used as the equivalent of 
i^vorriQLov \ a prophetic figure. The giving of the manna in the 
Exodus is a sacrament of the equality with which "Christ the sun 
;and true day in his church" gives the light of eternal life.^ "Also 
in the priest Melchizedek we see prefigured the sacrament of the 



^ "At Concordia in Italy, I saw an old man named Paulus. He said that 
in his youth he had met with an aged secretary of the blessed Cyprian, who told 
him that Cyprian never passed a day without reading some portion of Tertul- 
lian's works, and used frequently to say, 'Da magistrum,' 'Give me my master,' 
meaning Tertullian." Jerome. Catal. c. 3. cf. Jerome, Ep. 41. 

2 J. B. Poukens, Sacramentum dans les oeuvres de saint Cyprien. Etude 
lexicographique. Bulletin d'ancienne litterature et d'arch^ologie chretiennes. 
Oct. 1912. 

3 Ep. ad Pompeium contra Ep. Stephani. XI. 

4 Ibid. XI. 

6 Lib. de Oratione Dominica. XXXV. 
6 Ep. LXVIII. 14. 



THE EARLY FATHERS 15 

sacrifice of the Lord/ according to what divine Scripture testifies, 
and says, 

'And Melchizedek, King of Salem, brought forth bread and wine.' 
. . . P^or who is more a priest of the most high God than our Lord 
Jesus Christ, who offered a sacrifice to God the Father, and offered 
that very same thing which Melchizedek had offered, that is, bread 
and wine, to wit, his body and blood ?" ^ 

He sees another prophetic figure in Noah's ark. 

"Moreover, Peter himself, showing and vindicating the unity, 
has commanded and warned us that we cannot be saved, except by 
the one only baptism of one Church. Tn the ark,' says he, 'of Noah, 
few, that is, eight souls, were saved by water, as also baptism shall 
in like manner save you.' In how short and spiritual a summary 
has he set forth the sacrament of unity! For as, in that baptism 
of -the world in which its ancient iniquity was purged away, he 
who was not in the ark of Noah could not be saved by water, so 
neither can he appear to be saved by baptism who has not been bap- 
tized in the Church which is established in the unity of the Lord 
according to the sacrament of the one ark." ^ 

Moses, to bring victory to the Israelites in battle, has his arms 
outstretched "in the sign and sacrament of the cross." ^ Here, 
sacrament is not so much a prophetic figure as it is a symbol.^ 

The classical meaning of sacrament as a military oath is still 
found in the writings of Cyprian. In his attack on those who 
would accept the baptism given among heretics he says : 

"If glory is thus given to God, if the fear and the discipline of 
God is thus preserved by his worshippers and his priests, let us cast 
away our arms ; let us give ourselves up to captivity ; ... let the 



^ Notice the phrase "sacrament of the sacrifice of the Lord." An idea some- 
what similar has already been above in the discussion of Irenaeus' views of the 
sacrament as a sacrifice. See above, p. 22 ff. 
2 Ep. LXII^. 4.^^< 
3Ep. LXXiV. fi. 
y^ Ad Fortunatiim, 8. 
( 6 Poukens Sacramentum dans les oeuvres de saint Cyprien. 



1 6 PETER LOMBARD 

sacraments of the divine warfare be loosed ; let the standards of the 
heavenly camp be betrayed . . . " ^ 

We have stated above that cult, i.e., religious practice, often 
determines dogma. In Cyprian's case a situation developed which 
put great emphasis upon the validity of that sacrament which Ter- 
tullian had most clearly defined — Baptism. There is much discus- 
. sion of baptism, because of the two difficult questions of the valid- 
ity of the baptism of heretics, and of the re-baptism of those who, 
having lapsed during the severe Decian persecutions, were after- 
wards repentant and wished to return to the church. 

True baptism is only in the one church. "... How can 
he who baptizes give to another remission of sins, who himself, 
being outside the church, cannot put away his own sins ? ^ . . . 
We mean that remission of sins is not granted except in the 
Church, and that among hereitics where there is no church, sins 
cannot be put away." ^ Cyprian's problem was how to treat those 
who had defiled themselves after purification in baptism, by sacri- 
ficing to the pagan gods during the persecutions. The power of 
the divine grace in the water (as Tertullian had said) had been 
given th^m in baptism, and this they could not lose. Re-baptism 
of those who had lapsed was therefore not necessary, but only 
the laying-on of hands in penance. 

"It is sufficient to lay hands in penance upon those who are 
known to have been baptized in the Church, and have gone over from 
us to the heretics, if, subsequently acknowledging their sin and 
putting away their error, they return to the truth . . ." ^ 

This laying-on of hands he also calls a sacrament. "For 
then finally can they be fully sanctified, and be the sons of God, 
if they be born of each sacrament." ^ 

On their return to the Church, the lapsed were to make public 
confession and do penance, but Cyprian does not specifically refer 
to this as a sacrament. 



1 Ep. LXXIV. 8. 

2 Ep. LXX. I. (LXIX in translation — only the argument is given in Migne). 

3 Ep. LXX. 2. 

4 Ep. LXXI. Ad Quintum. 

5 Ep. LXXI^. Ad Stephanum. 



THE EARLY FATHERS 17 

"For although in smaller sins sinners may do penance for a 
set time, and according to the rules of discipline come to public 
confession, and by imposition of the hand of the bishops and clergy 
receive the right of communion :^ now with their time still unful- 
filled, while persecution is still raging, while the peace of the Church 
itself is not yet restored, they are admitted to communion, and their 
name is presented ; and while the penance is not yet performed, con- 
fession is not yet made, the hands of the bishop and clergy are not 
yet laid upon them, the eucharist is given to them." ^ 

The obvious conclusion from such a passage is that Cyprian 
thought of penance as a ceremony in which divine grace v^'as 
given to the penitent, through the laying-on of hands, and if so, 
penance was really to him a sacrament, though he does not call 
it so. 

Especially interesting is Cyprian's treatment of the sacra- 
ment of the Eucharist. Again, as in baptism, the practical 
exigencies of church administration bring the bishop of Car- 
thage, through directions for ritual, to a statement which reveals 
his conception of the sacramental efificacy of this central Chris- 
tian rite. One of his epistles is devoted to the "sacrament of the 
cup of the Lord." ^ This is an argument for the mixed chalice, 
and especially against offering water alone in the cup, a practice 
which, as Cyprian's letter shows, had spread throughout Africa 
generally and as modern scholars have demonstrated, even wider 
in the early Church.* Cyprian argues that the sacrament would 
not be complete if water only were offered. "We see that in the 
water is understood the people, but in the wine is showed the blood 
of Christ. But when the water is mingled in the cup with wine, 



^ Nam, ciim in minoribus peccatis agant peccatores poenitentiam justo 
tempore, et, secundum disciplinae ordinem, ad exomologesim veniant, et^per 
manus impositionem episcopi et cleri jus commimicationis accipiant .... 

2 Ep. IX. Ad Clerum. Tl 

3 Ep. LXIII. Ad Caecilium de sacramento Dominici calicis. 

4 Cyprian (ibid. c. 15.), quoting Tertullian (Ad Uxor. II. 5.), intimates that 
they drank water owing to the fact that had they partaken of wine in the morn- 
ing, they would have been detected by informers and sufifered persecution owing 
to the scent of wine on the breath. 



1 8 PETER LOMBARD 

the people is made one with Christ. . . . For if anyone offer 
wine only, the blood of Christ is dissociated from us; but if the 
water be alone, the people are dissociated from Christ ; but when 
both are mingled, and are joined with one another by a close 
union, there is completed a spiritual and heavenly sacrament." ^ 
Cyprian's plea for the orthodox ritual shows, almost uncon- 
sciously, the attitude which he assumes toward sacraments as such. 

In developing his point Cyprian uses language which at first 
glance might seem like a detailed exposition of the doctrine of 
sacraments. But upon second examination one sees that we have 
here simply an instance of that rhetorical and apologetic device 
so common in the Fathers — namely allegory. He concludes his 
explanation of the mixed chalice with a repeated emphasis on the 
Lord's commandment concerning the Eucharist. 

"But if we may not break even the least of the Lord's com- 
mandments, how much rather is it forbidden to infringe such impor- 
tant ones, so great, so pertaining to the very sacrament of our Lord's 
passion and our own redemption, or to change it by human tradition 
into anything else than what was divinely appointed." ^ 

His realization of the importance of the sacraments comes 
out quite clearly elsewhere. It seems inexpedient to quote further 
definite references, but perhaps the following passage will be suffi- 
cient as an example. He speaks of 

"those divine teachings wherewith the Lord has condescended to 
teach and instruct us by the Holy Scriptures, that, being led away 
from the darkness of error, and enlightened by his pure and shining 
light, we may keep the way of life through the saving sacraments." ^ 

It will be clear from the above discussion that Cyprian, em- 
phasizing on the one hand the figurative aspect, and on the other 
the effective grace of sacrament as a means of salvation, supplies 
the two "essential elements of the definition of sacrament, as it 
was to be established in the following centuries." * 



1 Ep. LXIII. 13. 

2 Ibid. 14. 

3 Treatise XII. (Introd.) 

^ Poukens, Sacramentum dans les oeuvres de saint Cyprien. 



THE EARLY FATHERS 19 

HILARY OF POITIERS (c. 3OO-367) 

In the works of Hilary, Bishop of Poitiers, writing about a 
century later than Cyprian, in the middle of the fourth century, 
we still find quite frequently the vague use of the word sacrament. 
As in earlier writers, for instance, he speaks of Samuel as show- 
ing the "sacrament of anointing," both of a prophet and of a king.^ 
Also, in his Commentary on Matthew, he says that Christ has 
promised to bear the burden of those who will take his yoke upon 
them, that is, receive the precepts of his commands, and approach 
him ''by the sacrament of the cross." ^ Again, he speaks of all 
mankind being called ''to the sacrament of the passion of the 
Lord." 3 

The whole of the practical side of Christianity as a system 
of life is taken for granted by Hilary, and his only references to 
baptism and the Eucharist are incidental to his discussion of doc- 
trinal problems, such as that of Christology. But his Chris- 
tological problem was that of the Divinity of Christ, not that of 
the nature of Christ which had been a subject of dispute at the 
Council of Nicaea, for we know from himself* that he was not 
acquainted with the Nicene symbol, and that he had never heard 
of the homoousion and homoiousion. This shows how little the 
theology of the West was influenced by the East in this period. 

Following St. Paul's Epistle to the Colossians, he says that 
as we are buried with Christ in his baptism, 

"we must die to the old man, because the regeneration of baptism 
has the force of resurrection. . . . For we rise again in him 
through faith in God, who raised him from the dead ; wherefore we 
must believe in God, by whose working Christ was raised from the 
dead, for our faith rises again in and with Christ." ^ 

Hilary's mention of the Eucharist is only in support of his 
argument "that Christ is God and man, and that through this 



. 1 Tract, in Ps. CXVIII. n. 5. 

2 Comment, in Matt. c. XI. n. 13. 
' 3 Ibid. c. XXXIII. n. 5. 

4 De syn. 91, II, 518 A. 

6 De Trinitate. IX. 9. 



20 PETER LOMBARD 

union must come the union of man with God." ^ The Eucharist 
is a means to this union. 

Hilary proceeds to make this point by an emphasis upon the 
Incarnation. The Word became flesh ; that flesh is offered to us 
in the sacrament; therefore we partake of the Word. This is a 
natural line for Christian thought, based largely upon Pauline 
teaching; but as stated by Hilary it makes one aware of the fact 
that the Incarnation itself had a sacramental aspect, — that it was 
the union of God and man, as the Eucharist symbolized the union 
of man with God, and although the Logos was spirit rather than 
merely grace, the difficulty of grasping that fact by even the theo- 
logical imagination is apparent in the very emphasis the doctrine 
received. Moreover, as one traces the history of the chief Chris- 
tian sacrament, the Eucharist, through the Middle Ages, the doc- 
trine of the Incarnation is seen to be a prerequisite to its formula- 
tion.^ 

As Hilary puts it — 

"For if in truth the Word has been made flesh and we in very 
truth receive the Word made flesh as food from the Lord, are we 
not bound to believe that he abides in us naturally, who, born as a 
man, has assumed the nature of our flesh now inseparable from him- 
self, and has conjoined the nature of his own flesh to the nature of 
the eternal Godhead in the sacrament by which his flesh is com- 
municated to us ?" ^ 

"For as to what we say concerning the reality of Christ's 
nature within us, unless we have been taught by him, our words 
are foolish and impious. For he says himself, 'My flesh is meat 
indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh and 
drinketh my blood abideth in me, and I in him.' As to the verity 
of the flesh and blood there is no room left for doubt. For now 
both from the declaration of the Lord Himself and our own faith, 
it is verily flesh and verily blood. And these when eaten and drunk. 



^ Cf. E. W. Watson, Post-Nicene Fathers, Introduction, p. v. 
' 2 On this see further the influence of John of Damascus. Compare Harnack, 
History of Dogma, IV, pp. 265, 301 ff. and Goetz, Die Abendmahlsafrage, p. 2. 
3 De Trin. VIII. 13. 



THE EARLY FATHERS 21 

bring it to pass that both we are in Christ and Christ in us. . . . " ^ 
"Now how it is that we are in him through the sacrament of 
the flesh and blood bestowed upon us, He Himself testifies, saying, 
'And the world will no longer see me, but ye shall see me ; because I 
live ye shall live also; because I am in my Father, and ye in me, 
and I in you.' . . . He would have us believe that he is in us 
through the mystery of the sacraments. . . .^ 

"I have dwelt upon these facts because the heretics falsely main- 
tain that the union between Father and Son is one of will only, and 
make use of the example of our own union with God, as though we 
were united to the Son and through the Son to the Father by mere 
obedience and a devout will, and none of the natural verity of com- 
munion were vouchsafed us through the sacrament of the Body and 
Blood ; although the glory of the Son bestowed upon us through the 
Son abiding in us after the flesh, while we are united in him cor- 
poreally and inseparably, bids us preach the mystery of the true and 
natural unity." ^ 

In other words, there are heretics who believe that Chris- 
tianity is not essentially a sacramental religion, who insist that 
the ceremony of the Eucharist — the central sacrament — is merely 
a symbol, conveying no effective grace. Hilary denounces these 
on the solid basis of orthodoxy. He adds nothing to the accepted 
belief, but on the contrary he receives it with such emphasis that 
his testimony is all the sounder as an historical document, as to 
what the Church in his day in the West was holding. 

AMBROSE (c. 340-397.) 

Ambrose, Bishop of Milan at the close of the fourth century, 
is the first of the Western Fathers to devote an entire treatise to 
the subject of the sacraments. The references in Irenaeus, Ter- 
tullian and Hilary were only incidental to their discussion of other 
matters. Ambrose is also important because of his very evident 
influence on his younger contemporary and pupil, Augustine. 

Ambrose's book, "Concerning the Mysteries" ^ was written 

1 Ibid. VIII. 14. 

2 Ibid. VIII. 15. 

3 Lib. de Mysteriis. 



22 PETER LOMBARD 

for the instruction of the newly baptized. Because of the Dis- 
cipHne of the Secret, which we have mentioned above, this 
teaching was not even given to the catechumens. The catechu- 
mens heard the lessons read from the Scriptures, and were .in- 
structed in morals, until their baptism. As Ambrose puts it in 
the introduction, 

"The season now warns us to speak of the Mysteries, and to set 
forth the purport of the sacraments, which if we had thought it 
well to teach before baptism to those who were not yet initiated, 
we should be considered rather to have betrayed than to have por- 
trayed the mysteries." ^ 

In this book, Ambrose treats of baptism, and the ceremonies 
that followed it, including confirmation, and the Eucharist. We 
find here the basis of much of the sacramental teaching of later 
centuries, but even so, Ambrose gives us no definition of just what 
he understands by the term sacrament. 

Perhaps the following passage sums up the essential elements 
of his teaching on the sacrament of baptism. 

''The reason why you were told before not to believe only what 
you saw, was that you might not say perchance. This is that great 
mystery 'which eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither has it en- 
tered into the heart of man.' ^ I see water, which I have been used 
to see every day. Is that water to cleanse me now in which I have 
so often bathed without ever being cleansed? By this you may 
recognize that water does not cleanse without the Spirit.^ 

"Therefore read that the three witnesses in baptism, the water, 
the blood, and the Spirit, are one, for if you take away one of these, 
the Sacrament of Baptism does not exist. For what is water with- 
out the cross of Christ? A common element, without any sacra- 
mental effect. Nor, again, is there the Sacrament of Regeneration 
without water : 'For except a man be born again of water and of the 
Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.' Now, even the 
catechumen believes in the cross of the Lord Jesus, wherewith he 
too is signed; but unless he be baptized in the name of the Father, 



1 Lib. de Myst. c. I. 2. 

2 1 Cor. ii. 9. 

3 Lib. de Myst. c. IV. 19. 



THE EARLY FATHERS 23 

and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, he cannot receive remission 
of sins, nor gain the gift of spiritual grace." ^ 

One passage, in the general discussion of baptism and its 
attendant rites, evidently refers to confirmation. 

"And then remember that you received the seal of the Spirit, 
the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and 
strength, the spirit of knowledge and godliness, and the spirit of 
holy fear, and preserved what you received. God the Father sealed 
you, Christ the Lord strengthened you, and gave the earnest of the 
Spirit in your heart,^ as you have learned in the lesson from the 
Apostle." 3 

Confirmation is here rather a part of the sacrament of bap- 
tism, than a separate sacrament. 

He compares the sacraments of the Church with those of the 
synagogue, to show that those of the Church "are both more an- 
cient than those of the synagogue, and more excellent than the 
manna." ^ 

"But yet all those who ate that food died in the wilderness, but that 
food which you receive, that living Bread which came down from 
heaven, furnishes the substance of eternal life; and whosoever shall 
eat of this Bread shall never die, and it is the Body of Christ." ^ 

Ambrose writes further of the Eucharist : 

"For that sacrament which you receive is made what it is by the 
word of Christ. But if the word of Elijah had such power as to 
bring down fire from heaven, shall not the word of Christ have 
power to change the nature of the elements?" ^ 

"The Lord Jesus himself proclaims : 'This is my Body.' Before 
the blessing of the heavenly words another nature is spoken of, after 
the consecration the Body is signified. He himself speaks of his 
Blood. Before the consecration it has another name, after it is 
called Blood. . . ."^ 



1 Lib. de Myst. c. IV. 20. 

2 2 Cor. V. 5. 

3 Lib. de Myst. c. VII. 42. 

4 Ibid. c. VIII. 44. 

5 Ibid. c. VIII. 47. 

6 Ibid. c. IX. 52. 
' Ibid. c. IX. 54. 



24 PETER LOMBARD 

"Christ, then, feeds his Church with these sacraments, by means 
of which the substance of the soul is strengthened." ^ 

Though we have still no attempt at a definition of the term 
sacrament, we have in these passages a very clear exposition of the 
sacramental idea, which was bound to have its influence on the 
theology of the later Church. 

In short, Ambrose, like Cyprian and Hilary, was an ecclesi- 
astic with a definite and practical problem. Even the teaching, 
therefore, which he embodies in his manual deals not with general 
concepts but with separate and detailed facts arising naturally in 
the exercise of his office as bishop. Definitions and philosophical 
conceptions originate in another setting, when the mind that sees 
the daily problem is either forced by controversy to larger form- 
ulations or is, on the contrary, set free to interpret the facts with 
a certain detachment of mind. In Ambrose's great pupil Augus- 
tine we find both of these apparently antagonistic prerequisites, 
and with him we come to a new turn in the development — a dis- 
cussion of the term itself along with the discussion of the Euchar- 
ist and baptism — and to this advance in clarification we must 
devote another chapter. 

1 Ibid. c. IX. 55. 



CHAPTER II 

The Formulation of the Definition of Sacrament 

st. augustine (354-43o.) 

In the works of St. Augustine, we find the first attempt at a 
definition of sacrament. He does not develop the subject, and 
gives only incidental references scattered through his many epis- 
tles, sermons and commentaries. Indeed his ideas on sacrament 
seem very vague, and he comes back again and again to add some- 
thing to his definition. 

A sacrament is a "sacred sign," ^ or "signs, when they per- 
tain to divine things, are called Sacraments." ^ In another place 
he says that "A sacrament is moreover in any celebration, when a 
commemoration of a thing done is so made, that something else 
is understood to be signified, which must be accepted devoutly." ^ 

In ar further explanation, Augustine says that sacraments 
must have a likeness of the things of which they are sacraments, 
else they are in no wise sacraments, and from their likeness to 
these things they receive their names. So according to this, the 
sacrament of the body of Christ is the body of Christ.^ 

Therefore they are called sacraments, because in them one 
thing is seen, another is understood.^ 

But perhaps a clearer understanding of his meaning may 
be secured from a passage in his Commentary on the Gospel of 
John. " *Now you are clean through the word which I have 



* De Civitate Dei. X. c. 5. 
»Ep. 138. (alias 5.) 

* * Ep. 55 (alias 1 19.) .... Sacramentum est autem in aliqua celebratione, 
cum rei gestae commemoratis ita fit, ut aliquid etiam significari intelligatur, 
quod sancte accipiendum est 

* Ep. 98 (alias 23.) 

• * Sermon 272. 

25 



26 PETER LOMBARD 

spoken unto you/ Why does he not say, you are clean through 
the Baptism with which you are cleansed, but he says, 'through the 
word which I have spoken unto you' ; unless because in the water 
also it is the word that cleanses? Take away the word, and what 
is water but water? Add the word to the element, and there 
results a sacrament, as if itself also a kind of visible word. : For 
certainly also he said this when he washed the disciples' feet: 
'Whoever has bathed does not need but to wash his feet, but is 
clean every whit.' Whence is such virtue of the water, that it 
touches the body and cleanses the heart, unless it is done by the 
word, not because it is spoken but because it is believed? For 
also in the word itself, part is passing sound, part the virtue 
remaining." ^ 

He repeats this definition in another work, and adds, "The 
virtue of the Word has cleansed us by water, because he walked 
on the waters." ^ 

With such varied ideas making up his definition of sacra- 
ment, it is not surprising that his uses of the word should ?ilso be 
very vague. He speaks of Easter^ as a sacrament, as well as the 
allegory of sacred numbers which he sees in the twenty-first 
chapter of John's Gospel.* Marriage,^ Ordination,^ circumcision, 
the Sabbath, and other observances of days are sacraments.'' He 
is; not quite consistent when he calls Noah's ark a sacrarnent, 
because of its likeness to baptism.^ He even uses it in the old 
sense of a mystery.^ 



* In Joannem Tract. LXXX. n. 3 . . . . Detrahe verbum, et quid est aqua 
nisi aqua? Accedit verbum ad elementum, et fit Sacramentum, etiam ipsum 

tanquam visibile verbum Unde ista tanta virtus aquae, ut corpus tangat 

et cqr abluat, nisi faciente verbo: non quia dicitur, sed quia creditur? Nam et in 
ipso verbo, aliud est sonus transiens, aliud virtus manens. 
.2 De Cataclysmo. 
^ 3Ep. 55. (alias 119.) 
^ * Ep. 55 (ad Januarium). c. 17. 
,6 De Bono Conjugali. c. 24. 
; , • * Contra Epistolam Parmeniani. II. c. XIII. 28. 
- ' De Spiritu et Littera. Lib. I. c. XXI. 

8 Contra Faustum. Lib. XIX. c. XII. 
. ' Ep. 140. c. 14. Profundum sacramentum nos intelligere voluit. 



FORMULATION OF THE DEFINITION 27 

To the sacraments of Baptism and the Euch^rist^ he devotes 
more attention and discusses their effect.^ 

The sacraments of the Old Testament were "shadows" ^ of 
those of the New Testament. Those of the New Testament 
give salvation, those of the Old promised a Saviour.* "Accord- 
ingly the first sacraments which were observed and celebrated 
under the Law, foretold the coming Christ: which when at his 
advent Christ fulfilled, were destroyed; and destroyed on this 
account, because fulfilled . . . and others were instituted of 
greater virtue, better utility, easier of performance, fewer in 
number." ^ 

Perhaps the most important contribution Augustine made to 
the development of the sacramental theory was the distinction that 
he so carefully drew between "sacraments".*' The sacraments may 
be common to all, but not the grace, which is the virtue of the 
sacraments.^ Without this sanctification of invisible grace, the 
visible sacraments profit nothing.^ However, the visible sacra- 
ment is not to be scorned, for the one who scorns it cannot be 
invisibly sanctified. 

It is this distinction which he follows in his discussion of the 
validity of the sacraments of heretics and other wicked persons. 
"Not so are they therefore not Sacraments of Christ and the 



* Ep. 98. 9. (alias 23.) 

' 2 De Peccatorum Meritis et Remissione. Lib. I. c. XXIV. 34. , 

' 3 Ep. 82. (alias 19). 14. 
< Enarratio in Ps. LXXIII. 2. 

* Contra Faustum. Lib. XIX. c. 13. 

•In Joannis Evang. Tract. XXVI. c. VI. 11 Nam et nos hodle 

accipimus visibilem cibum: sed aliud est Sacramentum, aliud virtus Sacra- 
menti .... 

' Enarr. in Ps. LXXVII. 2 Et cum essent omnia communia sacra- 

menta, non commiuiis erat omnibus gratia, quae sacramentonun virtus est. ► .. . . 

* Quaestionum in Heptateuchimi. Lib. III. q. 84. Nam sine ista sanctifica- 
tione invisibilis gratiae, visibilia Sacramenta quid prosunt? .... Proinde col- 
ligitur invisibilem sanctificationem quibusdam affuisse atque profuisse sine 
visibilibus Sacramentis, .... visibilem vero sanctificationem, quae fieret per 
visibilia Sacramenta, sine ista invisibili posse adesse, non posse prodesse. Nee 
tamen ideo Sacramentum visibile contemnendum est: nam contemptor ejus 
invisibiliter sanctificari nullo modo potest 



28 PETER LOMBARD 

Church, because they use them wrongly, not only heretics, but also 
all the wicked and impious. But they ought however to be either 
corrected or punished." ^ The sacraments, which those separated 
from the unity of the body of Christ celebrate, can show the form 
of piety, but the invisible and spiritual virtue of piety cannot be in 
them.^ In the good, the sacraments are unto salvation, in the 
evil unto damnation.^ 

It is by this virtue of the sacraments, grace, that "the mem- 
bers of the Body of Christ are regenerated with their Head." * 
Baptism he calls the laver of regeneration.^ In the baptism of 
an infant, **who has not yet the effect of faith, it is answered that 
he has faith on account of the sacrament of faith, and that he is 
converted to God on account of the sacrament of conversion, be- 
cause also the very response pertains to the celebration of the 
sacrament." ^ Sins are remitted by the strength of the sacra- 
ments.'' 

To sum up, St. Augustine gives us our first definitions of 
sacrament, and the distinction between the sacrament and the 
virtue of the sacrament, which is of so much importance in the 
later development of the sacramental system. But although his 
conception of sacrament as such is more clarified than that of his 
predecessors, he makes no effort to delimit the scope. He does 
definitely refer to Baptism and the Eucharist as sacraments, but 
is also vague in that he does not enumerate what ceremonies are 
or are not sacraments. 

ISIDORE OF SEVILLE (c. 560-636) 

It is not until the beginning of the seventh century that the 
sacraments became again a subject of even a brief discussion. 
Through all this time of ignorance and barbarism the rites of the 



* De Bapt. contra Donatistas. Lib. III. c. X. 13. 
« Sermo LXXI. c. XIX. 

3 Contra Donat. Ep. (vulgo, De Unitate Ecclesiae.) Lib. I. c. XXI. 57. 

* Enarr. in Ps. LXXVII. 2. 
» Enarr. in Ps. LXXVII. 2. 
•Ep. XCVm. 9. (alias 23.) 

» De Bapt. contra Donat. Lib. IV. c. IV. 5. 



FORMULATION OF THE DEFINITION 29 

Church were undoubtedly of more significance than its theology, 
and the usages of the Middle Ages were being consecrated by the 
vastly extended clergy, spread by missionary effort through the 
northern peoples. No one, therefore, was likely seriously to spec- 
ulate concerning the validity of what all took for granted. So it 
is rather as a matter of antiquarian interest than as a discussion 
of a live issue that the first encyclopaedist of the Dark Ages, 
Isidore of Seville, writing in Spain, at the beginning of the 
seventh century takes up the definition of sacrament, as a part 
of his encyclopaedic survey. The task he set himself was to 
gather together all the available learning of his day, in his 
"Origines" or * 'Etymologies." ^ In the section devoted to the 
sacraments, he quotes Augustine's definition, that a sacrament is 
in any celebration, which signifies something holy. The sacra- 
ments then are ''baptism and chrism, the body and blood." ^ 

In the next paragraph, however, Isidore says that "they are 
called sacraments on this account, because under cover of material 
things the divine virtue works salvation secretly, whence also 
from secret virtues, or from sacred, they are called sacraments." ^ 
This definition is a notable one, because it again brings the em- 
phasis on mystery in the sacrament. Isidore is certainly not an 
original thinker, but so far any source for this definition seems 
unknown. It is not from TertuUian, from whom Isidore learned 
so much.* 



* On Isidore, see further Ernest Brehaut, An Encyclopedist of the Dark 
Ages: Isidore of Seville; who does not, however, translate chapter XIX. 

2 Etymologies. Bk. VI. cap. XIX. n. 39. 

3 Etymologies. Bk. VI. cap. XIX. n. 40. Quae ob id sacramenta dicuntur, 
quia sub tegumento corporahum rerum virtus divina secretius salutem (eorum- 
dem sacramentorum) operatur, unde et a secretis virtutis, vel a s<icris sacramenta 
dicuntur. 

I have omitted the words in parentheses, because these seem interpolated 
from n. 41. See Heinrich Schwarz — "Observationes criticae in Isidori His- 
palensis Origenes." 

* Maximilian IClussmann, "Excerpta Tertullianea in Isidori Hispalensis 
Etymologiis collegit et explanavit." 



CHAPTER III 

The Eucharistic Controversy^ 

We now enter upon a period of reflection and controversy 
concerning the Eucharist, which engaged the attention of theo- 
logians for almost two centuries till it reached a climax in the 
condemnation of Berengar in 1079. This controversy was opened 
by the work of Paschasius Radbertus,^ monk of Corbey and abbot 
about 842. He was versed in the theology of the Eastern Church, 
especially in the work of Cyril of Alexandria and John of 
Damascus, and from them and yet more from Augustine did he 
draw his inspiration, though in the main his treatment follows 
that of Ambrose. His book "Of the Body and Blood of the Lord" 
was the first to elaborate for western Europe the doctrine of the 
miraculous conversion of the elements in the Eucharist, which in 
the twelfth century received the name of transubstantiation.^ 

Paschasius' doctrine of the miraculous change of the ele- 
ments into the real body and blood of Christ, after the consecra- 
tion by the priest was also linked up with the mystical conception 
of the spiritual character of the Lord's presence in the Euchar- 
ist, For instance, he says, "These mysteries are not carnal, 
though they are flesh and blood, but are rightly understood as 
spiritual." * In this he preserved an important element in the 
teaching of Augustine.^ But the more literal conception domi- 
nated. Radbertus' book was immediately challenged by Rabanus 



* On this whole subject, see Goetz, "Die Abendmahlsfrage," pp. 15-22. 

2 On Paschasius Radbertus, see further, de Ghellinck, Le mouvement theo- 
logique, passim, and Ernst, Die Lehre des hi. Paschasius Radbertus von der 
Eucharistie, Freiburg, 1896. Goetz, op. cit. pp. 3-10. 

3 See Gore, Dissertations on Subjects connected with the Incarnation, p. 
236. "Paschasius appears beyond all reasonable question to teach a doctrine of 
t ransubstantiation. ' ' 

* Ep. ad Frudegardum. (MSL 120. 1356.) 

* Darwell Stone, A History of the Doctrine of the Holy Eucharist. I, p. 217. 

30 



THE EUCHARISTIC CONTROVERSY 31 

Maurus (c. 776-856), Archbishop of Mainz, and later, at the 
request of King Charles the Bald, by Ratrammus (d. c. 868). 
These, as later Berengar, upheld the view that the change in the 
elements in the Eucharist was not a material one, but only spir- 
itual. 

This whole controversy over the nature of the conversion of 
the elements is of interest to us here only because it brought a 
new emphasis and importance to the conception of sacrament. 
For a long time however there was no real change in the expres- 
sions used in the definitions of the term. The phrases used by 
Augustine and Isidore are repeated again and again by all the 
writers of the period, and it is only with Berengar that we find a 
really new definition — and this he attributed to St. Augustine. 

Paschasius Radbertus himself, who began this great contro- 
versy by the publishing in 831 of his book "Of the Body and 
Blood of the Lord," takes his definition from Isidore — "The 
sacraments of Christ in the Church are baptism and chrism, and 
also the body and blood of the Lord, which are called sacraments 
on this account, because under their visible form, which is seen, 
the flesh is secretly consecrated by the divine virtue." ^ There is 
nothing original in this definition of sacrament, for it is taken 
almost word for word from Isidore.^ It is a very definite use of 
the term, but alongside it, in the very same passage, we find that 
Paschasius uses it in the old vague sense, when he speaks of our 
redemption "by the sacrament of Christ's nativity and hu- 
manity." ^ 

Rabanus Maurus' rejection of the theory of a miraculous 
conversion of the elements naturally had an effect on his concep- 
tion of the term sacrament. He begins his discussion by quoting 



* Lib. de Corpore et Sang. Domini, c. Ill, 2. Sunt autem sacramenta 
Christi in Ecclesia baptismus et chrisma, corpus quoque Domini et sanguis, 
quae ob hoc sacramenta vocantur, quia sub eonun specie visibili, quae videtur, 
secretins virtute divina caro consecratiir. 

2 See p. 29. 

3 Ibid. Sacramento vero nativitatis et humanitatis ejus, et nos redimimur 
ad veniam 



32 PETER LOMBARD 

Augustine's definition and adds to it Isidore's, giving also his 
enumeration of the sacraments. He adds, however, that "in 
Greek it is called a mystery, because it has a hidden dispensa- 
tion." 1 

"Yet there are more forms of baptism, which purge a man of 
sins and confer an increase of sanctity." Besides the baptism of 
water, there are the baptisms of the Holy Spirit and of martyr- 
dom.^ 

In the same passage he says, "For souls are believed to be 
saved from the chains of sins through confession and through 
true penance^ with the sting of tears," but he seems to find noth- 
ing sacramental in this, and does not include penance in his list 
of sacraments. 

The significant point for us, here, is that he bases his belief in 
a spiritual rather than a material change in the Eucharistic ele- 
ments on Augustine's distinction between the sacrament and the 
virtue of the sacrament. "The sacrament indeed is received in 
the mouth, the inner man is satisfied with the virtue of the sacra- 
ment. Therefore because bread strengthens the body, so it is fitly 
called the body of Christ: wine moreover, because it affects the 
blood in the flesh, so it is referred to the blood of Christ. These 
moreover while they are visible, sanctified then through the holy 
Spirit are changed into the sacrament of the divine body." * 

This view, that the elements are changed "into the sacra- 
ment of the divine body" is a contrast to the view of Paschasius, 
that the elements are changed into the real flesh and blood of 
Christ, and which therefore maintains the identity of the Euchar- 
istic and historical body of Christ. 

The opposition of the views of Rabanus Maurus and others 



* De Universo. Lib. V. c. ii. 

Also in De Clericorum Institutione. Lib. I. c. 24. and De Ecclesiastica 
Disciplina. Lib. II. 

Unde et graece mysterium dicitur, quod reconditam habeat dispensa- 
tionem. 

2 De Universo. ibid. 

3 Poenitentia. De Universo. Lib. V. c. 11. 

* De Universo. Lib. V. c. 11. 



THE EUCHARISTIC CONTROVERSY 33 

seems to have impelled Paschasius Radbertus to send a second 
edition of his book, with a letter to King Charles the Bald, request- 
ing him to have the question decided. King Charles sent the book 
to another monk of Corbe, Ratramnus, giving him two questions 
to answer, concerning this controversy about the Eucharist. ( i ) 
Is the Eucharist the body of Christ in a mystery or in reality? 
(2) What is the relation of the Eucharistic to the natural body? 
These questions of course rather limited the scope of his '*Of the 
Body and Blood of the Lord," and he was not at liberty to develop 
the subject as he might otherwise have done. Paschasius had 
maintained that after the consecration by the words of Christy 
his body and his blood were present on the altar. ^ To Ratramnus 
the bread and wine became, not palpably, but figuratively the 
body and blood of Christ.^ He defends his position by quoting 
from some of the same authorities as Paschasius had used, and 
from several passages we learn how his idea of sacrament was 
based upon these. He gives Augustine's definition that sacra- 
ments must have the likeness of the things of which they are the 
sacraments.^ To this he adds the distinction between the "sacra- 
ment" * and the "thing of the sacrament." "We confess that in 
the sacrament of the body and blood of the Lord, what is received 
without, is applied to the nourishment of the body : the Word of 
God moreover, which is the bread invisibly existing in this sacra- 
ment, invisibly by its participation, feeds the minds of the faith- 
ful by vivifying them." ^ From Isidore he quotes Augustine's 
"A sacrament is moreover in any celebration when a commemora- 
tion . . . is so made, that something else is understood to be 
signified . . ." "Saying this he shows that every sacrament 



^ Goetz, Die Abendmahlsfrage, pp. 3-10. 

^Goetz, p. II. 

3 De Corpore et Sanguine Domini. XXXV. 

* Ibid. XXXVI. 

5 Ibid. XLIV. Ista dicendo confitemur quod in sacramento corporis et 
sanguinis Domini, quidquid exterius sumitur, ad corporis refectionem aptatur: 
Verbum autem Dei, qui est panis invisibiliter in illo existens sacramento, invisi- 
biliter participatione sui fidelium mentes vivificando pascit. 



34 PETER LOMBARD 

in divine things contains some secret; and there is something 
which appears visibly, something else in truth — which must be 
accepted invisibly." ^ He follows Isidore still farther, that 
"under the cover of material things, the divine virtue works salva- 
tion secretly." ^ The sacraments are baptism, chrism, the body 
and blood — the enumeration which Isidore gave.^ "Therefore 
they are called sacraments, because in them something is seen, 
something else is understood : what is seen, has a corporeal form; 
what is understood, has spiritual fruit." ^ 

The teaching of Ratramnus had considerable currency in the 
later period. It reappears even in the "Homilies" of the English 
Aelfric (c. 955-1020?), and as we shall see shortly figured prom- 
inently in the Berengarian controversy, but later, as the views it 
advanced were definitely branded as heretical, it dropped from 
sight until, again at the Protestant reformation, it interested the 
Protestant theologians.^ 

BERENGAR OF TOURS (d. IO88) 

The training of Berengar was unusual for his day. His 
earlier interests were in dialectic and the Roman Classical authors, 
from whom he derived a freer method than had been common. 
Later he came to a study of the Bible and of the Church Fathers, 
•especially Gregory the Great and Augustine, but also Ambrose 



1 De Corp. et Sang. Dom. XLV. 

2 Ibid. XCIII. 

3 An instance of this is seen in the fact that it was translated into English 
by Humfrey Linde in 1549, under the title "The Book of Bertram the Priest, 
concerning the Body and Blood of Christ in the Sacrament." 

Nicholas Ridley, bishop of London, quoted it during his conference with 
Secretary Bourn: "Sir, it is certain that other before these (e. g. Carlstadt, 
Melanchthon, etc.) have written of this matter; not by the way only, and obiter, 
as do for the most of all the old writers, but even ex professo, and their whole 
books entreat of it alone, as Bertram." 

It is interesting to note that the Catholics accused the Protestants of forging 
the work. Bourn says to Ridley: "He wrote ad Henricum (meaning Henry VIII), 
and not ad Carolum, for no author maketh any such mention of Bertramus." 

A Conference between Nicholas Ridley and Secretary Bourn, Ridley, Works, 
pp. 158-159. 



THE EUCHARISTIC CONTROVERSY 35 

and Jerome.* As a pupil of Fulbert^ at the famous school of 
Chartres,^ he was much influenced by the teaching of his master, 
somewhat by his ideas,* but was not won over to his traditional 
theology of the beginning of the Middle Ages/"^ 

About 103 1 he was made Canon of Tours and head of the 
cathedral school, where he had many pupils. Before 1040 he was 
elected Archdeacon of Angers, but continued to reside at Tours. 
During the next ten years he developed views concerning the Eu- 
charist which led to a controversy far more acute than that of 
the ninth century. His view was one of opposition to the accepted 
belief of the Church of his day, in a change in the substance of 
the Eucharistic elements. Before 1050 he was receiving letters 
asking him to deny the heretical views concerning the Eucharist 
which he was supposed to entertain. He evidently considered 
himself orthodox, for early in 1050 he wrote to Lan franc, then 
Prior of Bee, affirming that he held the doctrine of John Scotus 
Erigena concerning the Eucharist, and rejected that of Pasch- 
asius, and declaring that if Lanfranc regarded John the Scot as a 
heretic, he must similarly condemn Ambrose, Jerome and Augus- 
tine, By a curious mistake of the period, however, it was Ratram- 
nus' book "Of the Body and Blood of the Lord" to which he 
was referring as the work of John the Scot. His attitude, 
though, differed radically from that of Ratramnus — it was con- 
troversial rather than positive. His methods and terms were 



* Jacobi (Hauck) in Realencyklopadie, article Berengar von Tours. 

See also, Hermann Renter, Geschichte der religiosen Aufklarung im Mit- 
telalter, passim. 

2 Fulbert of Chartres was not an original thinker — ^his importance was as a 
teacher, and his influence is shown in the splendid theological training he gave 
his pupils, among whom perhaps the most important was Berengar. Renter 
(p. 89) says of him, "Nicht fahig originelle Gedanken zu entwickeln und mit- 
zuteilen, hat Fulbert als Bildner der Eigentumlichkeit begabter Schuler seine 
Virtuositat in der anregenden Kraft seines Umgangs gezeigt." 

3 On Berengar of Tours, see also Jean Ebersolt, Essai sur Berenger de Tours 
et la controverse sacramentaire au Xle si^cle. Revue de I'histoire des religions, 
vol. 48. 1903. pp. 1-42, 137-181. 

* Darwell Stone, op. cit. I, p. 244. 
' Jacobi, ibid. 



36 PETER LOMBARD 

those of the new dialectic. He had indeed been accused of 
"deserting authorities and taking refuge in dialectic," ^ to which 
he replied that ''to take refuge in dialectic through all obstacles 
is the mark of the best judgment; because to take refuge in 
dialectic is to take refuge in reason, and he who does not take 
refuge there, seeing that it is in virtue of the possession of rea- 
son that man is made in the image of God, has deserted his own 
honor, and cannot be renewed from day to day in the image of 
God." 2 

The letter to Lanfranc, spoken of above, had a most unfor- 
tunate effect on Berengar's career. For its recipient was in Rome 
when the letter reached him, and since it had already been read 
by others, he gave the matter over to the pope, to save his own 
reputation for orthodoxy. Successive Church councils excom- 
municated Berengar and condemned his writings, and with them 
the book of Ratramnus, on which he had depended. Thrice did 
he recant and sign the statements^ which the authorities presented, 
and at the end he could only purchase peace by his silence and 
retirement. 

From this long period of controversy comes his best known 
work, "Of the Sacred Feast"* and in it along with his contro- 
versial discussion of the Eucharist, there is a treatment of the 
conception of sacrament, which contains a new definition of the 
term — "a sacrament is the visible form of invisible grace." ^ He 
attributes this to St. Augustine, but he gives no reference as he 
usually does in quoting the Fathers. This definition is not found 
in Augustine, though perhaps it rests upon the passage in which 



* See Berengarii Turonensis — De Sacra Coena, adv» Lanfrancum, edit. A. F. 
and F. Th. Vischer. p. 99. 

* Ibid. p. loi. 

3 These decrees may be found in Darwell Stone, op. cit. I, pp. 247-257 and 
again in the article by the same on Berengar in Hastings' Encyclopaedia of 
Religion and Ethics. 

For a further discussion of the controversy cf . Gore, op. cit. pp. 247 ff. 

* The manuscript was discovered by Lessing in the library at Wolfenbuttel. 
'De Sacra Coena. op. cit. p. 114. Est enim sacramentum praescribente 

beato Augustino invisibilis gratiae visihilis forma. 



THE EUCHARISTIC CONTROVERSY 37 

he asks, "For without this sanctification of invisible grace, of what 
value are the visible sacraments ?" ^ We have already noted that 
Berengar was greatly influenced by Ratramnus, but this definition 
he found neither in the work of Ratramnus, nor in that of John 
the Scot himself, nor did it come from Fulbert of Chartres. 

The distinction between "sacramentum" and the "res sacra- 
menti" he made the basis of his argument for a more spiritual con- 
ception of the Eucharist. The "sacramentum" or the sacred sign 
is opposed to the "res sacramenti," that which is signified by the 
sacrament. "The sacrament is visible, the thing of the sacrament 
{res sacramenti) is invisible." " In his interpretation of the pas- 
sage "If any man eat of this, he shall not die for ever," he quotes 
Augustine that this "pertains to the virtue of the sacrament, not 
because it pertains to the visible sacrament." ^' 

LANFRANC (d. I089) 

Berengar 's personal friend, Lan franc, who was the famous 
teacher of logic and dogmatic theology at Bee, was naturally 
called upon to defend the doctrine of the conversion of the ele- 
ments. This defence interested and occupied him for thirty years, 
and to his influence was due the desertion of Berengar's cause by 
Hildebrand and others at the Roman court. Lanfranc's views 
on the whole subject of the Eucharist he sums up in his book "Of 
the Body and Blood of the Lord" written some years after he 
became archbishop of Canterbury. In this he defines sacrament 
in several different ways. A sacrament is "a sacred sign," * but 
this is only one meaning of the term to Lan franc. 

"Sacraments indeed of those things of which there are sacra- 
ments always bear a likeness, just as in the sacrament, concerning 



* Quaestionum in Heptateuchum. Lib. III. q, 84. Nam sine ista sanctifi- 
catione invisibilis gratiae, visibilia sacramenta quid prosunt? 

* De Sacra Coena. p. 245. 

*De Sacra Coena. p. 245. Inquit, sed quod pertinet ad virtutem sacra* 
menti, non quod pertinet ad visibile sacramentum. 
[John 6, 51 b.] 

* De Corp. et Sang. Domini, c. 12. 



38 PETER LOMBARD 

which the question is raised, while the host is broken, while wine 
is poured from the chalice into the mouths of the faithful, what 
other is represented than the sacrificing of the body of the Lord 
on the cross and the pouring forth of blood from his side ?''^ 
"In the form of bread and wine, which we see, we honor things 
invisible, that is the flesh and blood of Christ." ^ 

"A sacrament is also called an oath, not because it has the 
likeness of that thing, but because a confirmation or negation of 
Something is made on sacred things/' ^ In this he returns to one 
of the original meanings of the Latin word "sacramentum,*' 
which we have already noted in Tertullian — the military oath. 
However he comes shortly to the more general concept, with the 
remark that "A sacrament is also called a consecration of any- 
thing." ^ With this rather vague conception of sacrament he 
names as the four ecclesiastical sacraments: faith, baptism, the 
consecration of the body and blood of the Lord, the remission of 
sins.^ 

With Berengar and his opponent Lan franc and others ends a 
period in which the cruder views have begun to disappear. As 
the page of history is turned, the rising Scholasticism of the 
twelfth century takes up the task of formulating the doctrine of 
conversion, which these controversies had clarified. 



* De Corp. et Sang. Domini, c. 13. 

* De Celanda Confessione. 



CHAPTER IV 

Efforts After Codification 

In the survey of thought which leads to Peter Lombard we 
have now reached a period full of life and movement, crowded 
with significant names, and we shall do well at the outset to 
gain some appreciation of the interrelations between these 
teachers.^ We have indeed come to a time of codification. For 
centuries men have been laboriously threading their way through 
mazes of thought concerning the sacraments, without much seri- 
ous attempt to deal with the problem as a whole. The hour has 
now come for them to gather opinions and decisions and codify 
them into systems. 

In this period Paris and Bologna are the great centers of 
teaching and disputation, and in these two classes are discern- 
ible — canonists and theologians. The canonists were connected 
in larger measure with Bologna, as were the theologians with 
Paris, and when the great wave of eagerness for learning came 
over Europe, the stamp which these men had given continued and 
the University of Paris,, when founded, became prevailingly an 
institution for the cultivation of theology, as Bologna was the 
first law school. 

The interest in codification was true of both these lines of 
ecclesiastical study, and reached its climax at the middle of the 
twelfth century in the two great text-books, Gratian's "Decre- 
tum," the culmination of the work of the canonists, and Peter 
Lombard's "Sentences," which in a similar way presents the cour 
elusions of the theologians. 

While most of the Masters who prepared the way for these 



^ On this period, see Hastings Rashdall, Universities of Europe in the Mid- 
dle Ages, passim. 

Also, de Ghellinck, Le Mouvement th^logique, passim. 

39 



40 PETER LOMBARD 

works studied either Canon Law or Theology, a few devoted 
themselves to both, though canonists could never wholly divest 
themselves of theological speculation nor theologians of the fas- 
cination of the law. As the body of knowledge increased and the 
provinces of law and theology were more clearly defined, it be- 
came impossible or unadvisable for one man to master both. It 
will be convenient, however, in this discussion to divide the 
teachers rather arbitrarily into the two classes of the canonists 
and theologians, and to begin the subject with the canonists. 

ANSELM OF LUCCA 

The first of these to demand attention is Anselm of Lucca 
(d. 1086), the nephew of the Anselm of Lucca who became 
Pope Alexander II, who made one of the earliest collections of 
canon law. In the ninth book of this collection, which he devotes 
to the sacraments, he names only those of the altar, baptism and 
confirmation.^ No one can be saved without baptism, and with- 
out it no one ought to participate in the body and blood of the 
Lord.^ However, the imposition of hands by the bishop is to be 
venerated rather than baptism.^ He, too, makes the distinction 
between the sacrament and its virtue, for "the virtue of the sacra- 
ment is not in sacraments which those separated from the Church 
celebrate." * Heretics have sacraments and the Scriptures only 
in semblance, not for salvation.** In these last opinions he is 
resting upon Augustine's teaching.® This collection of canons was 
incorporated almost entire in the Decretum of Gratian, and there- 
fore exercised a great influence on the development of canon law. 

IVO OF CHARTRES 

Ivo of Chartres, one of the most fruitful and learned ecclesi- 
astical writers of the late eleventh and early twelfth century, is 

* Collectio Canonica. Lib. IX. 
« Ibid. Lib. IX. c. 27. 
•Ibid. Lib. IX. c. 26. 

« Ibid. Lib. IX. c. 56. 
» Ibid. Lib. IX. c. 39. 

• See p. 28. 



EFFORTS AFTER CODIFICATION 41 

best known for his work as a canonist. His first work was the 
"Decretum" in seventeen books, which served as the basis for his 
more perfectly organized and well-arranged "Panormia" 
in eight books, compiled about 1095 or 1096. He builds on the 
work of Burchard of Worms and on other, unknown sources, and 
is, in turn, one of the most important forerunners of Gratian. 
His views on the sacraments we see not only in his writings on 
canon law but also in several of his sermons. He speaks of the 
sacraments of the Eucharist and of baptism, but also vaguely 
and indefinitely of exorcisms, prayers, signing with the cross, 
the salt on the catechumens' tongue, and holy water, as sacra- 
ments. He treats of Penance and of the seven orders of the 
clergy, but does not call them sacraments.^ His discussion of the 
seven orders of the clergy became the Tractate on orders added 
by a later hand to the "Summa Sententiarum," and so became, 
indirectly, a source for Peter Lombard's treatment of the sub- 
ject in the fourth book of his "Sentences." 

ALGER OF LIEGE (d. C. II31) 

Alger of Liege, who acquired great renown in canon law and 
theology in the early part of the twelfth century. In his "Trac- 
tate of Mercy and Justice" he attempted to harmonize the seem- 
ing contradictions in the canon law, and in so doing gave many 
citations from the Scriptures and the Fathers, as proofs of his 
statements. This was one of the most important sources of 
Gratian's "Decretum," for in it Gratian not only found the 
Patristic citations that he needed, but also the explanatory chapter 
titles which the so-called Dicta Gratiani often borrowed, and from 
it adopted the arrangement of the book. 

In theology, his book "Concerning the Sacraments of the 
Body and Blood of the Lord" ranked with the writings of Lan- 
franc and Guitmund of A versa in maintaining the doctrine of 
transubstantiation against the writings of Berengar which had 
been condemned more than thirty years before. He was one of 



1 Sermo I, II, IV, V, VIII; Decreti Pars I, II. 



42 PETER LOMBARD 

the first to explain how the accidents of the Eucharist exist with- 
out the subject. He discusses the meaning of sacrament in the 
first book of this work, and gives the same definition which Ber- 
engar had given — "the visible form of invisible grace." It was 
not because he approved the opinions of that condemned heretic, 
but because he accepted that writer's accrediting of it to Augus- 
tine, and unlike Berengar, gave the reference to the Questions 
on Leviticus.^ "Moreover it must be known that a sacrament 
and mystery differ in this, that a sacrament is a sign signifying 
something visible, but a mystery, something hidden signified 
by it." 2 

He also quotes Augustine's definition that a sacrament must 
have the likeness of that of which it is a sacrament, and makes 
the distinction between the sacrament and the "virtue of the 
sacrament." ^ He enumerates only the usual three sacraments- 
baptism, chrism, and the body and blood of the Lord..^ 

GRATIAN (C. IO95-C. 1 1 50) 

We have already mentioned three of the most famous early 
canonists, and come now to the master of the science of canon 
law, Gratian, whose work rests upon that of his predecessors, 
but greatly surpasses theirs. The very title of his book — "Con- 
cordia Discordantium Canonum" ^ (about 1142) — defines his 



^ De Sacram. Corporis et Sang. Domini. Lib. I. c. IV. (Refer, in Aug. : 
Quaest. in Heptat. q. 84.) 

2 Ibid. Lib. I. c. IV. Sciendum autem quod sacramentum et mysterium in 
hoc diflFerunt, quia sacramentum signum est visibile aliquid significans, mys- 
terium vero aliquid occultum ab eo significatum. 

3 Ibid. Lib. I. c. V. 

* Ibid. Lib. LcVIIL Also Lib. IIL c. V. 

* Commonly known as "Concordantia," as Boudinhon in Encyc. Brit, 
article, "Canon Law," but Heyer has shown that it should be Concordia. (Zeit- 
schrift der Savigny-Stiftung fur Rechtsgeschichte, v. XXXIII, Kanonistische 
Abteilung, v. II, 19 12, pp. 336-342.) 

On the date, see Paul Fournier, Deux Controverses sur les Origines du Decret 
de Gratien- Revue d'histoire et de litt^rature religieuses. III. 1898. pp. 97-116, 
253-280. 

"Le Decret de Gratian a €t6 tr^s vraisemblablement redig6 vers 1140, ou 
tout au moins k une ^poque plus voisine de 1140 que de 11 50." p. 280. 



EFFORTS AFTER CODIFICATION 43, 

purpose. It was bold thus to name it, for it acknowledges the 
lack of harmony in church law, and emphasizes the need of com- 
pilation and harmonizing. His method is the usual one of the 
period. He incorporates bodily texts from Scripture, letters and 
decrees of bishops and popes, as they had already been gathered 
by his predecessors, groups and comments on them, in his attempt 
to harmonize them. If they appear to disagree, one may be of 
local application only, the other of general ; one may be later than 
another and a progressive development in church law may be 
admitted; and if these methods fail, he adopts the characteristic 
scholastic method of arguing that the meanings of words may 
differ at different times. His original comments are incorporated 
between the quoted texts, and known as the "Dicta Gratiani,'* the 
titles of which, as we have already seen, are often borrowed from 
Alger of Liege. 

The "Concordia" or "Decretum," as it was soon wrongly 
called, became the manual in all the schools and universities, for 
canon law, as Peter Lombard's "Sentences" for theology, and 
was glossed and commented upon by Gratian's pupils and then 
by other famous canonists for succeeding centuries. 

Though the "Dicta" often evince a certain freshness of 
thought, it is surprising to note that in the definition of sacra- 
ment, Gratian shows little or no originality. He quotes the 
familiar definitions of Augustine and Isidore,^ and that of Ber- 
engar, that "a sacrament is the visible form of invisible grace." ^ 
In this passage, he says the sacraments are baptism, chrism, the 
body and blood. ^ But elsewhere, he speaks of the "sacrament of 
unction," * and he uses it quite vaguely of the dedication of a 
church of the giving of orders.^ The "sacrifice of the altar is the 
sacrament of unity." ^ 



^ Decretum. c. 84. Caus. I. Q. i. 

2 Ibid. c. 32. Dist. II. De cons. 

3 Ibid. c. 84. Caus. I. Q. i. 

* Ibid. c. 39. Caus. I. Q. i. 

6 Ibid. c. 106. Caus. I. Q. i, 

* Ibid. c. 63. Dist. II. De cons. 



44 PETER LOMBARD 

Some sacraments are of dignity, others of necessity. Those 
that are necessary to salvation cannot be repeated, but he does 
not state what these are.^ 

The sacraments may be performed even by unworthy min- 
isters, '^because the divine virtue works secretly in them, and this 
virtue or power is only of divine, not of human efficacy." ^ 

"The sacrifice, moreover, of the church is accomplished in 
two, the sacrament and the thing of the sacrament, that is the 
body of Christ. There is therefore the sacrament, and the thing 
of the sacrament, that is, the body of Christ." ^ 

"As the visible sacrament of water is necessary to the ablu- 
tion of the visible body, just so the invisible doctrine of faith is 
necessary to the sanctification of the invisible soul." * 

We have seen that these are phrases often repeated by theo- 
logians for centuries, and for anything new on the subject we 
must turn to the men whom Gratian influenced. 

ROLAND BANDINELLI (d. I181) 

An example of the doctors of this period who were interested 
both in canon law and theology was Roland Bandinelli. In canon 
law he wrote a commentary on Gratian's "Decretum," the 
"Stroma" or "Summa Magistri Rolandi," in which he set forth 
views afterwards contradicted by some of his decisions when a 
few years later he was Pope Alexander III. In theology his book 
of "Sentences" followed very largely the method and style of 
Abelard's "Theologia," which we must discuss more fully in 
another connection. His intimate knowledge of canon law, how- 
ever, made him much less dependent on Abelard than were his 



1 Ibid. c. 39. Caus. I. Q. i. VI. Pars. Sed notandum est, quod sacramen- 
torum alia sunt dignitatis, alia necessitatis. 

2 Decretum. c. 84. Caus. I. Q. i Quid uirtus diuina secretius opera- 

tur in eis, et diuinae solummodo est hec uirtus siue potestas, non humanae 
efficaciae. 

3 Decretum. c. 48. Dist. II. De cons. . . . Conficitur autem sacrificium 
ecclesiae duobus, sacramento, et re sacramenti, id est corpore Christi. Est igitur 
sacramentum, et res sacramenti, id est corpus Christi. 

* Decretum. c. i. Dist. IV. De cons. 



EFFORTS AFTER CODIFICATION 45 

contemporaries, and he often combats Abelard's views.^ Denifle 
argues that his Sentences were written between 1139 and 1141 or 
1 142, and so before the work of Peter Lombard.^ 

If this be so, it is striking to note that he mentions all seven 
sacraments, though not in as positive and settled a way as Peter 
does : baptism, confirmation, the sacrament of the body and blood 
(in which he treats also of the consecration of priests), penance, 
unction (in connection with this, the sacerdotal keys), and matri- 
mony.^ Denifle thinks his ''Sentences" were used immediately by 
his contemporaries, and that we can see this influence in the Sen- 
tences of Magister Omnebene, whose work also was built up on 
the "Theology" of Abelard. 



* P. Heinrich Denifle, O. P., Die Sentensren Abaelards und die Bearbeittm- 
gen seiner Theologia vor Mitte des 12. Jhs. in Archiv fur Litteratur- u. Kirchen- 
geschichte des Mittelalters. I. p. 460. 

* Denifle, op. cit. pp. 438, 603-605, 611. 

P. Fr. Ambrosius M. Gietl, O. Pr., Die Sentenzen Rolands nachmals Papstes 
Alexander III Introd. p. XVII, thinks Roland's work comes after that of the 
Lombard, but his arguments do not seem to me conclusive. 

' Denifle, op. cit. p. 460. 

Roland Bandinelli — Sententiae, edited by Gietl. 

Hie videndum est de clavibus sacerdotalibus .... Cum enim recipit 
ordinem sacerdotalem, simul et has claves recipit. 



CHAPTER V 

Predecessors of the Lombard 

bonizo of piacenza 

Turning now to the doctors who devoted themselves entirely 
to the study of theology, the first name of note is that of Bonizo, 
Bishop of Piacenza,^ who wrote a short book on the sacraments 
in which he divides them into two classes : those instituted by the 
Lord, and those instituted by the apostles. Christ instituted 
baptism,* which was necessary to salvation, and, the Eucharist. 
The Eucharist took the place of the Passover, the "sacrament of 
the old law," which had been abolished at the last Supper,^ when 
Christ said, "With desire I have desired to eat this Passover with 
you before I suffer. For I say unto you, I shall not eat it, until 
it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God." ^ 

"Now I come to the sacraments instituted by the apostles. 
. . . When anyone comes to be catechized, he seeks exsufflation 
by the priest, by which the unclean spirit is expelled; he receives 
salt at the hands of the priest, who says : Receive the salt of wis- 
dom, which is profitable for you to life eternal: not because life 
eternal is given to the catechumens, but because salt is the sacra- 
ment of faith, which works through love and leads those baptized 
to life eternal." ^ 

"Now we must pass to the sacrament of oil, which is divided 
into three parts. For there is the oil of chrism, by the signing 



* He was earlier Bishop of Sutri, which see he lost in 1082, being imprisoned 
by the Emperor Henry IV, because of his support of Gregory VII. He escaped 
from prison in 1085 and fled to Matilda, Coimtess of Tuscany, and shortly after- 
wards was elected bishop of Piacenza. His Libellus de Sacramentis was written 
after his elevation to this see. 

2 Lib. de Sacram. 

3 Lk. 22, 15. 

* Libellus de Sacramentis. 

46 



PREDECESSORS OF THE LOMBARD 47 

with which the seven-fold grace of the holy Spirit is given. And 
there is the oil of exorcism, by which catechumens are anointed 
for the casting out of the enemy. And there is the oil of the 
sick for the health of the body and the preparing of the 
soul. ... "1 

The most significant point to note in this passage, in the light 
of later development, is the ascription of only two sacraments, 
baptism and the Eucharist, to Christ, while the others were insti- 
tuted by the apostles. This was the common view^ of the period, 
and for a century later, as for instance in Peter Lombard's state- 
ment that unction was ''instituted by the apostles." ^ But the 
thirteenth-century theologians, on the contrary, assumed, that all 
seven were instituted by Christ. 

ABELARD (IO79-II42) 

In the intellectual movements of the twelfth century the com- 
manding figure is Master Peter, surnamed Abelard, born at Le 
Pallet in Brittany about the year 1079, of noble lineage. Though 
the eldest son, he renounced his claims and the possibility of a 
military reputation, saying, "I prefer the strife of disputation to 
the trophies of war." 

Of his numerous books, the two which most influenced the 
men whom we are to consider, were the "Sic et Non" and the 
*'Theologia," though these were not the most important for his 
theological doctrines. "The "Theologia," because of its plan, 
influenced several writers of books of Sentences, but the "Sic et 
Non" had a more striking effect on the period, because its methoa 
created so much controversy, and yet despite this, many contem- 
poraries, otherwise conservative, were willing to learn much 
from it. 

The method of the "Sic et Non" was characteristic of the 
man. Contradictory opinions of the Fathers and doctors of the 
Church were arranged under questions which were designedly 



ilbid. 

2 Lagarde, The Latin Church in the Middle Ages. p. 35. 

3 Lib. IV. Dist. XXIII. c. III. 



48 PETER LOMBARD 

asked in such a way as to suggest rather than declare his doubt as 
to the final statement. This method seemed to flaunt an attitude 
of independence toward the ancient authorities, but Abelard al- 
ways claimed to be a faithful servant of the Church. It was in the 
prologue to this work that he laid down a defence of all criticism 
— "By doubting we are led to inquire, by inquiry we perceive the 
truth." 1 

His work is also an example of the love of codification char- 
acteristic of that age. Unlike Gratian and Peter Lombard he did 
not attempt to harmonize the opinions of church teachers, for he 
declared the principle that "ecclesiastical doctors are to be read 
not with the necessity of believing, but with the liberty of judg- 
ing. 

In two other ways than in method he taught contemporary 
writers. He was superior to all his predecessors in the gift for 
orderly arrangement, and this bore fruit in the "Sentences" of 
Roland Bandinelli and Peter Lombard. Again, his collection of 
patristic materials, though much of it was taken from the work 
of his predecessors as Alger of Liege, yet certainly it was very 
largely increased from his own wide reading, and many citations 
were for the first time put at the disposal of canonists and theo- 
logians. 

The title usually given to Abelard's book, "Introduction to 
Theology," is wrong — it should have been simply "Theology" 
which was to be an introduction to the study of the Scriptures.^ 
Part only of it has come down to us, but some of it may be infer- 
entially recovered from four books of Sentences which evidently 
follow it very closely. 

These four books of Sentences are the so-called "Epitome," 
the "Sentences" of a St. Florian manuscript discovered by Den- 
ifle, those of Roland Bandinelli and of Magister Omnebene. It 
is certainly not a matter of chance that these four books of 
Sentences begin with the words: "There are three things, as I 
judge, in which the sum of human salvation consists, that is, 



* Sic et non Prolog e. 

2 Denifle, op. cit. I. p. 602. 



PREDECESSORS OF THE LOMBARD 49 

faith, charity, and the sacraments" ^ — it is evident that this was 
borrowed from the "Theology" of Abelard. No other book out- 
side the Abelardian school has such an Incipit.^ 

Also the plan of these four books was the same. Each fol- 
lows the threefold division of faith, sacraments and charity. 
This was a better arrangement than the four-fold division of 
Peter Lombard.^ 

Abelard quotes Berengar's definition — "But a sacrament is 
the visible sign of the invisible grace of God, just as when any- 
one is baptized, the exterior ablution of the body, which we see, 
is the sign of the interior ablution of the soul, since the inner 
man is so cleansed from sin, as the outer from bodily stains." * 

The "Epitome of Christian Theology," often attributed to 
Abelard, seems to be the first book we have that was influenced 
by Abelard's "Theology." The correct title is the "Sentences of 
Master Peter Abelard," ^ but it is really by a follower of his. 
Its author also quotes "A sacrament is the visible sign of invisible 
grace," ^ and names baptism, confirmation and the sacrament of 
the altar as "major sacraments." ^ These major sacraments can- 
not be repeated, and he explains concerning the Eucharist, that 
"the same host is not consecrated twice." ^ In another passage, 
however, he speaks of "the sacrament of marriage," ^ and in the 
chapter on the "sacrament of unction," he adds that "a Christian 
is thrice anointed, first when a baby, that is, in baptism, where 
sins are remitted; secondly in confirmation, where the gifts of 
grace are conferred; thirdly at the end of life, where either all 
sins, or the greatest part, are blotted out." ^ 

^ Epitome, c. I. 

* Denifle. op. cit. p. 599. 

' So Denifle. op. cit. p. 600. Peter Lombard's division was probably taken 
from that in John of Damascus' "The Foimtain of Knowledge" and derives ori- 
ginally from a fanciful reference to the four rivers of Paradise. 

* Introductio ad Theologiam. 

* Denifle. op. cit. p. 591. 

* Epitome, c. I. 

» Epitome, c. XXX. 
« Epitome, c. XXXI. 
» Ibid. c. XXX. 



50 PETER LOMBARD 

These four books of Sentences — ^the "Epitome," that of the 
St. Florian manuscript, and those of Roland and Omnebene — 
show clearly the direct influence of Abelard's teaching, but other 
writings of the period were indirectly affected by it, and to these 
we shall come presently. 

ROBERT PULLUS (c. IO80-C. II50) 

Another influence against the heretical teaching of Abelard 
with its suggestions of new possibilities, was the work of Robert 
Pullus, the first English Cardinal. He was educated in England, 
was a Master at Oxford, and Archdeacon of Rochester, and then 
about 1 135 went to Paris, and a few years later to Rome, where 
he was made Cardinal and Chancellor of the Holy Roman Church. 
He embodied his teaching in his "Eight Books of Sentences." 
"Sentences," of course, is an incorrect translation for the Latin 
"Sententiae," which means "opinions." The predecessors of the 
various Books of Sentences of this century had been called 
"Flores" or "Excerpta" and only occasionally "Sententiae." ^ 
His range of subjects is wide, but his book lacks orderly arrange- 
ment, and this makes it very hard to gather what his conception 
of sacrament was. In the fifth book he treats of the sacraments 
of baptism^ and of confirmation,^ and speaks of confession as our 
"second refuge after shipwreck,** ^ baptism being the first. "The 
sacrament offers itself to the eye, the thing itself is traced out by 
the mind. A sacrament is made in the body, but the virtue of the 
sacrament in the mind." ^ In book six, he discusses Penance. 
"The sacrament however of binding and loosing is in the power of 
the vicars of God themselves, that is, the priests of the Church." ^ 
He also calls Penance the "sacrament of remission and absolu- 



1 de Ghellinck, op. cit. p. 24. 

On Robert Pullus, see the Catholic Encyclopaedia, s. v. See also de Ghel- 
linck, op. cit., passim. 

2 Sententiarum Libri Octo. Lib. V. c. XVI. 

3 Ibid. Lib. V. c. XXII. 

4 Ibid. Lib. V. c. XXX. 
B Ibid. Lib. V. c. XV. 

« Ibid. Lib. VI. c. LXL ^ 



PREDECESSORS OF THE LOMBARD 51 

tion." "Absolution is a sacrament, since it is the sign of a sacred 
thing. And of what sacred thing is it the sign, unless of remis- 
sion and absolution?" ^ 

In the seventh book he mentions incidentally the ^'sacrament 
of ordination" which must not be repeated, as baptism also is not 
to be repeated.^ He speaks somewhat indefinitely of marriage as 
a sacrament, but speaks of the three good things in marriage as 
faith, off-spring and sacrament.^ The latter part of this he takes 
from St. Augustine. 

In the last book he discusses the "sacraments of the body and 
blood of the Lord," and also speaks of them as a sacrifice.* 

It will be seen from these citations that Robert has made no 
distinctly original contributions to the more specific definition of 
sacrament. He is for the greater part simply repeating phrases 
with which we have already grown familiar. Yet one might have 
expected more and better of him, for other subjects in his tractates 
are often handled with force and not seldom with originality. 
Other phases of theological thought would seem to have better 
accorded with his genius. His books of Sentences enjoyed much 
popularity in his own time, but were speedily excelled in public 
estimation by the work of Peter Lombard, who was far more 
skilful in the statement of Scholastic formularies and had better 
success in meeting the wishes of the church authorities. 

HUGH OF ST. VICTOR (c. IO78-II41) 

Once more in the history of Catholic thought there appears 
a commanding personality, a man of varied parts, rich alike in 
powers of meditation, in gifts of teaching, and in powers of ex- 
position. Hugh of St. Victor comes to the problem of the defi- 
nition of sacrament from an entirely different point of view: 
that of the mystic. "With Hugh the material creation in its 
deepest verity is a symbol; . . . Scripture, besides its literal 



1 Ibid. Lib. VI. c. LXI. 

2 Ibid. Lib. VII. c. XIV. 

3 Ibid. Lib. VII. c. XXXIX. 
* Ibid. Lib. VIII. cs. I, II. 



52 PETER LOMBARD 

meaning is allegory from Genesis to Revelation; . . . the 
means of salvation provided by the Church are sacramental, and 
thus essentially symbolical." ^ 

The mysticism inaugurated by Hugh was quite evidently a 
reaction from the contentious theology of Roscellin and Abelard. 
It was fortunate for the new dialectic, that Hugh, who was emi- 
nently orthodox, should have adopted it, for it would otherwise 
have been condemned because of its connection with the hetero- 
doxy of Abelard. 

Hugh is important in the development of the definition of 
sacrament, for he begins its final formulation, gathering the 
scattered statements of Augustine into a large synthesis, and set- 
ting aside the Isidorean definition. Beyond this, his own origi- 
nality achieved a new definition, more comprehensive than any 
preceding one, which was perfected by the author of the "Summa" 
and then passed into general acceptance in the schools. 

Hugh, whose teaching at the school of the Abbey of St. 
Victor in Paris was so important for the development of Scho- 
lastic theology, devotes an entire treatise to the discussion of the 
sacraments, **Of the Sacraments of the Christian Faith." 

"A sacrament is a corporeal or material element sensibly 
presented from without, representing from its likeness, signifying 
from its institution, and containing from sanctification some invis- 
ible and spiritual grace. ^ . . . 

*'Its likeness is from creation ; its institution from dispensa- 
tion; its sanctification from benediction. . . . There is there- 
fore water the visible sacrament, and invisible grace, the thing 
(res) or virtue of the sacrament.^ . . . 



* H. O. Taylor, The Medieval Mind. II. p. 90. Inge defines his system as 
modifying "imcompromising Platonic Realism by Aristotelian science." Chris- 
tian Mysticism, p. 140. 

Cf. also Hamack, History of Dogma (Eng.). vol. VI. p. 43. 

* De Sacramentis Christianae Fidei. Lib. I. Pars IX. c. 2. Sacramentum 
est corporale vel materiale elementum foris sensibiliter propositum ex similitudine 
repraesentans, et ex institutione significans, et ex sanctificatione continens ali- 
quam invisibilem et spiritualem gratiam. 

« Ibid. c. 2. 



PREDECESSORS OF THE LOMBARD 53 

"Add the word of sanctification to the element and there 
results a sacrament, so that visible water may be a sacrament 
representing from its likeness, signifying from its institution, con- 
taining from its sanctification, spiritual grace. In this way in 
other sacraments also it is necessary to consider these three 
things." 1 

It will be readily seen from these quotations that Hugh has 
borrowed much from the theologians who preceded him, and 
especially from St. Augustin, but the material is synthesized as it 
has not been before, and to this synthesis Hugh adds original dis- 
cussion of his own. 

His three-fold classification of sacraments is original. "For 
there are some sacraments in which salvation principally consists 
and is received, as the water of baptism, and the receiving of the 
body and blood of Christ. There are others which even if they 
are not necessary to salvation (because salvation can be had with- 
out them) yet are serviceable for sanctification, because by them 
virtue can be exercised and more abundant grace acquired, as the 
water of sprinkling, and the receiving of ashes, and the like. 
There are again other sacraments which seem to be instituted for 
this only, that through them those things which are necessary for 
sanctifying and instituting other sacraments, may thus be pre- 
pared and sanctified.^ . . . The first therefore are founded for 
salvation, the second for exercise, the third for preparation." ^ 

In another passage he speaks of the unction of the sick as a 
sacrament, which was instituted by the Apostles.* Marriage is 
also a sacrament, the only one instituted before sin.^ He devotes 
a large part of this treatise "Concerning the Sacraments" to a dis- 
cussion of Penance and the remission of sins, and though he em- 
phasizes the sacerdotalism of confession and penance and abso- 
lution, he does not name it a sacrament.*^ 

* Ibid. c. 2. 

2 De Sacram. Lib. I. Pars IX. c. VII. 

3 Ibid. Lib. I. Pars IX. c. VII. 
« Ibid. Lib. II. Pars XV. 

5 Ibid. Lib. II. Pars XL c. i. 

• De Sacram. Lib. II. Pars XIV. 



54 PETER LOMBARD 

Sacraments may consist in things, in acts, or in words. ^ 
The Blessing of palms on Palm Sunday is a sacrament, in memory 
of Christ's entry into Jerusalem. The palm is the sign of victory^ 
branches, of good works. ^ The breathing in exorcism, the spread- 
ing out of the hands, bending the knees are all sacraments in 
acts.^ Others are in words, such as the singing of the Agnus Dei 
in the Mass, or the recital of the creeds. It is strange that he 
should still use the word sacrament in such vague senses, when he 
had so limited its meaning in the definitions he gave. 

Hugh died in 1141, very shortly after the completion of this 
book, but the fact that his great gift had been as a lecturer made 
possible the wide dissemination of his views by the dispersal of 
his students, and accounts for the incorporation of his ideas in 
later treatises, and also for the attributing to him of unauthentic 
books, of which the **Summa Sententiarum" deserves considera- 
tion. 

Summa Sententiarum 

This "Summa," usually attributed to Hugh of St. Victor, is 
probably not his, but originates with some member of his school. 
The "Summa" was certainly written later than the "De Sacra- 
mentis," upon which it leans, while its doctrines and formulae 
give evidence of progress. Besides this, it borrows from the 
school of Abelard errors and formulae which Hugh made the 
objects of his attacks. The close examination which Pour rat has 
given it supports and extends these arguments by showing the 
differences in the sacramental teaching.* 



1 Ibid. Lib. II. Pars IX. c. i. 

2 Ibid. c. 4. 

3 Ibid. c. I. 

* Catholic Encyclopaedia, "Hugh of St. Victor," by Edward Myers. 
Realencyklopadie — Hugo von St. Victor, by Zockler. 
R. Seeberg (tr. Hay) — History of Dogmas, vol. II. pp. 62, 80, 
P. Heinrich Denifle. — Die Sentenzen Hugos von St. Victor, in Archiv fur 
Literatur- imd Kirchengeschichte des Mittelalters. Bd. III. pp. 634 ff. 
Pourrat — La th^ologie sacramentaire. 



PREDECESSORS OF THE LOMBARD 55 

The "Summa" contains a tractate on *' Sacraments in Gen- 
eral" and in the following tractates discusses the individual sacra- 
ments. It was one of the sources on which Peter Lombard evi- 
dently depended for quite a considerable amount of his material. 
This is clearly apparent from the style. 

The fourth tractate begins the discussion of sacrament.^ 
■'Against sins original as well as actual, the remedies of the sacra- 
ments were invented, concerning which these three things must be 
•considered: what a sacrament is, why instituted, and in what 
(things) it consists. Augustine: A sacrament is the sign of a 
sacred thing. The same : A sacrament is the visible form of invis- 
ible grace,^ just as in the sacrament of baptism the interior ablu-^ 
tion is figured through the exterior and visible. For any sacra- 
ment ought to have the likeness of that thing of which it is the 
sacrament. Wherefore Augustine : For if the sacraments do not 
have the likeness of those things of which they are sacraments, 
they are in nowise sacraments. It is objected that the aforesaid 
definition is not applicable to sacraments alone, since also before 
sanctification this applies to water so that it is the visible form of 
invisible grace, just as the stains of the body are taken away by 
water, so the stains of the soul through grace. But that it may 
apply to sacraments only, it must be understood thus: A sacra- 
ment is the visible form of invisible grace gathered in it, which 
the sacrament itself confers. For it is not only the sign of a 
sacred thing, but also its efficacy.^ And this is what distinguishes 
between sign and sacrament; because for this that it be a sign it 
does not require anything save that it signify that of which it is 
held (to be) the sign, not that it confer it. But a sacrament not 
only signifies, but also confers that of which it is the sign or sig- 



^ Cf. this following quotation with Peter Lombard, Lib. Sent. IV. Dist. i. 

2 As noted above, this was wrongly attributed to Augustine by Berengar, 
and the mistake is ever afterwards repeated. 

^Summa Sententiarum, Tract IV. c.i. Sacramentum est visibilis forma 
invisibilis gratiae in eo collatae, quam scilicet confert ipsum sacramentum. 
Non enim est solummodo sacrae rei signimi, sed etiam efiScacia. 



56 PETER LOMBARD 

nification.^ ... A sacrament not only signifies from its insti- 
tution, but also represents from its likeness.^ 

However, the author of the "Summa" also uses it in the old 
vague way, "When sacred things or mystic" are spoken of in the 
sacred Scriptures, "as the sacrament of the Incarnation." ^ 

The subsequent tractates in the "Sentences" deal with Bap- 
tism, Confirmation, the Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction and 
Marriage as sacraments.* Of these the most important is the 
treatment of penance, for the author saw the significance, in 
this connection, of emphasizing that power of the keys "which 
priests^ have," for the administration of that sacrament in which 
the ecclesiastical discipline could be maintained. "These keys 
are discernment and power. For there is first to be discerned 
who are bound, who loosed; and afterwards the power must be 
used. In consecration, through the ministry of the bishop, these 
keys are given to priests alone. But it does not seem that either 
priests only or all priests have these ; because many before ordina- 
tion know who are bound and who loosed, many after consecra- 
tion lack this knowledge; and so not all priests have these two." ^ 
The sacerdotal keys, then, are given in ordination, by a bishop, 
but ordination is not distinctly treated as a sacrament. This 
interest in the power of the keys perhaps shows the interest of a 
churchman for his order. 

A part of the "Sentences" has come down to us as the "Theo- 
logical Tractate" of Hildebert of Lavardin, Bishop of Mans and 
later Archbishop of Tours, at the end of the eleventh century.^ 



^ Ibid. Sacramentum vero non solum significat, sed etiam confert illud 
cujus est signum vel significatio, 

2 Ibid. Sacramentum non solum ex institutione significat, sed etiam ex 
similitudine repraesentat. 

3 Ibid. Quandoque in sacra Scriptura res sacra et mystica, sicut sacra- 
mentum incarnationis. 

4 Ibid. Tract. V, VI, VII. 

See discussion of Tract. VII. in the Realencyklopadie article cited above, 
•and in Denifle, op. cit. 

6 Ibid. Tract. VI. c. XIV. 

* R. Seeberg, (tr. Hay.) History of Dogmas, vol. II. p. 62. 



PREDECESSORS OF THE LOMBARD 57 

In this part we learn that "from the beginning of the world, both 
in the time of the natural law, and in the time of written law, there 
were the remedies of the sacraments against sins original and 
actual." ^ 

This adequate treatment of the definition of sacrament by 
Hugh of St. Victor and his follower, the author of the "Summa," 
forms the climax of the development we have tried to trace, and 
brings us to Peter Lombard, who is able to enter into the heritage 
of many generations of theologians and sum up their work in the 
text-book which should teach the whole Church for centuries. 



* Hildebert, Tractatus Theologicus. c. XL. 



CHAPTER VI 
Peter Lombard and His Text-Book 

i. introduction 

Manuals which gather knowledge or opinion and present it 
in orderly form often live longer and sometimes seem to exert an 
influence far exceeding the works of original genius. Donatus 
wrote in his "Ars Grammatica'* the rules of composition devised 
by many, which he alone collected and ordered for common in- 
struction. He had deserved fame as a teacher, to whom Jerome 
went as a pupil, but the "Ars Grammatica" became the school- 
book of the Middle Ages, was still in use at the Reformation, 
while its author's "name became a common metonymy (in the 
form donet) for a rudimentary treatise of any sort." 

Still greater has been the vogue of Euclid, who in the third 
century before the Christian era produced his "Elements" which 
in varied forms are still the books of instruction for youth in the 
science of geometry. 

Similar to the role played by these two is that of the greatest 
theological text-book of the Middle Ages, to whose author we 
have at last come. 

2. THE life of PETER THE LOMBARD 

Peter Lombard, the "Master of the Sentences," was born in 
Lumello, not far from Novara, (which then belonged to Lom- 
bardy), probably about i loo. His family, both poor and obscure, 
was unable to educate the son and there was small hope for a 
career in the church until he found a patron in the Bishop of 
Lucca, who sent him to school at Bologna. The success in his 
studies achieved there made him wish to go to France and in this 

58 



PETER LOMBARD AND HIS TEXT-BOOK 59 

desire again his patron helped him with a letter of recommenda- 
tion to St. Bernard, Abbot of Clairvaux.^ 

Bernard at first placed him in the episcopal school at Rheims, 
which then enjoyed a great reputation, under the headship of 
Lotolf,^ where he remained but a short time. Paris was really 
the centre of the intellectual movement of the day, and it is there- 
fore not surprising that Peter wished to go thither.^ 

Bernard, who had provided for his needs at Rheims, now 
wrote recommending him to Gilduin, Abbot of St. Victor, for 
the short stay which he intended to make in Paris.* The school of 
St. Victor was at that time famous for its learning. It was to 
this abbey that William of Champeaux had retired in 1108, and 
with him had come many of his pupils. William was made Bishop 
of Chalons in 11 13, but his successor Gilduin, elected abbot the 
following year,^ maintained the tradition of piety and learning, 
and to the school came students from all over Europe, of whom 
perhaps the most famous was Hugh of Blankenburg, better 
known as Hugh of St. Victor. 

The Lombard probably came to Paris before 11 39, just as 
Abelard had resumed his career as a teacher there. Probably 
Peter Lombard heard his lectures,^ at least he read his books, for 
John of Cornwall tells us that "he frequently had his book in his 
hands." ^ He also studied Gratian's "Decretum," which had just 
been finished. And it was precisely these two influences, Abe- 
lard and Gratian, which most conditioned his later method of 
exposition. ' 



* F. Protois, Pierre Lombard, Eveque de Paris, son Epoque, sa vie, ses 
Merits, son influence, pp. 27-29. Catholic Encyclopaedia, Peter Lombard. En- 
cyclopaedia Britannica, Peter Lombard. Realencyklopadie, Petrus Lombar- 
dus. J. de Ghellinck, S. J., Le Mouvement th^ologique du Xlle si^cle. pp. 
126-130. 

2 Protois, op. cit. p. 30. de Ghellinck, op. cit. p. 126. 

3 Protois, op. cit. p. 31. de Ghellinck, op. cit. p. 127. 

* Ep. 160. Protois, op. cit. pp. 31-32. de Ghellinck, op. cit. p. 127. 
^Protois, op. cit. p. 33. 

« de Ghellinck, op. cit. pp. 126-127. 

' Frequenter prae manibus habebat. Eulogium ad Alexandrum III. c. III^ 
(MSL 199, 1052.) 



6o PETER LOMBARD 

He soon gained the chair of Theology at the Cathedral 
School of Notre-Dame/ which he filled for many years, and in 
which he won great and enduring repute. By 1142, his Gommen- 
tary on the Epistles of St. Paul had become known. In 1148 he 
was at Rheims with Robert of Melun, and joined Adam du Petit- 
Pont and Hugh of Reading as opponents of Gilbert de la Porree 
in theological discussions. He is already well enough known to 
be consulted by Pope Eugene HI,^ and no greater evidence of the 
regard in which he was now held could be found. 

Some time during the years 1 1 48-1 150 he was at Rome, prob- 
ably on account of the troubles arising in the Paris schools.^ 
While there he became acquainted with the work of John of Da- 
mascus, "The Fountain of Knowledge," which had just been 
translated by Burgundio of Pisa. This again shows us his interest 
in the latest publications. His own fertility of mind was matched 
with a desire to know the thoughts of others. 

At the beginning of 1152, when his successful teaching at 
Paris had made his reputation, and when his "Libri Sententi- 
arum" had just been finished, a bull of Eugene HI gave him a 
prebend in the diocese of Beauvais,^ again on the recommenda- 
tion of Bernard of Glairvaux. 

His teaching had been opposed in some points by Robert of 
Melun and Maurice de Sully,^ but Peter endeavored always to 
keep it orthodox, though taking account of all the opinions of the 
day. He was always circumspect, always deferential to authority, 
and a friend of peace. His instruction, despite this opposition, 
was successful, and his pupils, realizing the merit of his lectures, 
begged him to publish them. To this request, we owe the cele- 
brated Books of Sentences.^ 

In 1 1 59, the bishopric of Paris was vacant by the death of 



* Protois, op. cit. pp. 34-39. 

* de Ghellinck, op. cit. pp. 127-128. Protois, op. cit. p. 35. 
3 de Ghellinck, op. cit. pp. 127, 173-174. 

* de Ghellinck, op. cit. p. 128. 
6 Ibid. 

•Protois, op. cit. pp. 39-41. 



PETER LOMBARD AND HIS TEXT-BOOK 6i 

Thibaut. Philip of France, fourth brother of King Louis VII, 
and Archdeacon of Paris, was elected to succeed him. He de- 
clined, but advised the canons to elect Peter Lombard, whose 
pupil he had been, and whose talents and services fitted him for 
this dignity. Later in the century, Walter of St. Victor accused 
him of gaining the election by simony,^ but there seems to have 
been no just ground for this accusation.^ 

In July, 1 1 60, Peter was succeeded in the bishopric by 
Maurice de Sully, a Master in Theology, and the builder of the 
present Cathedral of Notre-Dame. Peter died some time after^ : 
the date is not known, but it cannot have been later than 1 164.* In 
the cartulary of Paris we find his name mentioned a couple of 
times. The house in which he had lived was given to the Church 
of Paris, and Stephen Langton, archbishop of Canterbury, pre- 
sented the original manuscript of the Sentences to the Cathedral 
Library, for the benefit of poor students.^ It is most surprising 
that a man whose book has been so widely known, should be 
mentioned so seldom by contemporary historians. 

3. THE LOMBARD^S EARLIER WORKS 

From the earlier period of Peter Lombard's life three works 
have come down to us : the Commentary on the Psalms of David, 
the Commentary on the Epistles of St. Paul, and his Sermons. 

For the study of the Scriptures the Middle Ages had a num- 
ber of collections of the comments of the Fathers on the several 



* Episcopus licet simoniace intrusus in ecclesia. Excerpta ex Libris. Ex 
Kb. II. 

2 de Ghellinck, op. cit. pp. 128-129. Protois, op. cit. p. 46. 

' de Ghellinck, op. cit. pp. 129-130. 

*He was buried in the church of St. Marcellus, near Paris. His epitaph 
reads: Hie iacet Magister Petrus Lombardus, Parisiis episcopus, qui composuit 
librum Sententiarum, glossas psalmonim et apostolorum, cuius obitus dies est 
XIII Kal. Augusti. 

The recumbent effigy on the tomb is evidently from the century following, 
for the episcopal mitre is not correct for the Lombard's date. Protois, op. dt. 

p. 54. 

* de Ghellinck, op. cit. p. 129, and n. 3. 



62 PETER LOMBARD 

books of the Bible. In the Lombard's time the most celebrated 
was that of Walafrid Strabo, known as the Glossa ordinaria, 
written in the ninth century. At the beginning of the twelfth 
century Anselm of Laon added new notes to this, between the 
lines, and his work was known as the Glossa interlinearis. Peter 
Lombard simply used this Glossa and composed his commentary 
almost entirely of citations from Augustine, Cassiodorus, the 
Glossa of Alcuin, Rabanus Maurus and others, which were 
included in the Glossa. Following their example, he does not 
entirely give up the literal sense of the passage, but always inclines 
rather to the spiritual and mystical interpretation.^ 

His commentary on St. Paul's Epistles was written about 
1 1 40. Like that on the Psalms it is hardly more than a compila- 
tion of extracts from the writings of Ambrose, Hilary, Jerome, 
Augustine, Cassiodorus and Remi of Auxerre.^ 

The Lombard's sermons are very hard to date. Some are 
probably from the time of his episcopate, others certainly seem 
to be from the period of his residence with the canons of St. 
Victor. Their pulpit was famous, and Peter must also have 
preached there. The sermons are still unpublished. Some of his 
sermons are said to be inferior in style to that of the Books of 
Sentences and would therefore lead us to believe that they were 
from an earlier period. Some also show quite strikingly the influ- 
ence of the strong mysticism of St. Victor.^ 

4. THE ^'fOUR books OF SENTENCES'^ 

The book on which Peter Lombard's fame rests, and from 
which he gained his title of "Master of the Sentences" was the 
"Libri Quatuor Sententiarum." This was probably written about 
1 150: this date seems to fit in best with the few facts that we 
know about his life, and with his use of Gratian's "Decretum" 
and John of Damascus' "Fountain of Knowledge," which Peter 



* Protois, op. cit. pp. 120-123. 
2 Protois, op. cit. pp. 123-149. 



PETER LOMBARD AND HIS TEXT-BOOK 63 

himself tells us had been translated by order of Pope Eugene 
III/ from the Greek into Latin. ^ 

In the Prologue to the ** Sentences," Peter Lombard declares 
that he has gathered the opinions of the Fathers into one volume, 
that the student may be saved the handling of a number of 
books. He makes no pretence to originality. The Middle Age 
was a period of codification in all branches of knowledge, and the 
Lombard follows a long line of canonists and theologians who had 
devoted themselves to gathering and codifying the opinions of the 
Fathers and Doctors of the Church on questions of doctrine. In 
the first half of the twelfth century, this parallel development of 
Canon Law and Theology was summed up in two great text- 
books, Gratian's **Decretum" or "Concordia Discordantium Can- 
onum" and Peter Lombard's "Libri Quatuor Sententiarum." 
The legend that made Peter and Gratian brothers is untrue,^ but 
it is at least an interesting expression of the comparison that the 
Middle Ages always drew between their two books. 

Up to the twelfth century there had been no text-book for the 
study of theology. It is certainly interesting, then, to see how the 
Lombard systematized the theological teaching of the Middle 
Ages into a compendium which became the basis of the instruction 
in the schools and universities for centuries, and the starting- 
point for the work of all Catholic theologians. 

In this task, Peter Lombard owed much to the work of his 
predecessors, and especially to the books of his contemporaries, 
which appeared a few years before his own. There are only 
about ten lines in the whole book for which no source can be 
found. 

Abelard had already led the way in the systematizing of 
theology by his "Theologia," and we can see the widespread influ- 
ence of this in several books : the "Sentences of Peter Abelard," 



M. 19, 13. 

2 R. Seeberg, History of Dogma (tr. Hay) pp. 62-63. 
de Ghellinck, op. cit. pp. 127, 130-131. 
' de Ghellinck, op. cit. pp. 122-126, 277-346. 



64 PETER LOMBARD 

or the "Epitome," as it is usually erroneously called, a collection 
of Abelard's opinions made by some of his pupils, the "Sentences" 
of Roland Bandinelli, later Pope Alexander III, of Omnebene, 
and most important of all, those of Peter Lombard.^ 

For his method, the Lombard was more dependent on the 
model of Abelard's "Sic et Non" : ^ the gathering of "authorities" 
in a systematic, methodical way, for and against a doctrine. But 
unlike Abelard, he makes some attempt at reconciling the differ- 
ences between his authorities, by subtle distinctions and clever 
inferences.^ Peter states the proposition, quotes the authorities 
on the subject, which are often quite contradictory, and ends with 
a few words which show the true conclusion, as he sees it. He is 
always timid, always modest, and some of his conclusions are 
intentionally stated quite vaguely.* His humility and modesty 
are summed up admirably in the rather discouraged words at the 
end of one distinction, "If anyone can explain this better, I am 
not envious." ^ 

In the arrangement of his book he does not follow Abe- 
lard's "Theologia." That was divided under the headings Faith, 
Charity and Sacrament. Peter Lombard's division into four books 
was perhaps taken from John of Damascus' "Fountain of Knowl- 
edge," which he followed quite closely in the first three books. In 
the Prologue he says that he will divide the books into chapters 
with titles, so that "what is sought may be found more easily." 
In this arrangement he was influenced by the Decretum.^ Later, 
in the next century, it was divided into "Distinctions.'* ^ 



^ P. Heinrich Denifle, O. P., Die Sentenzen Abaelards und die Bearheitungen 
seiner Theologia vor Mitte des 12. Jhs. Archiv fur Litteratur- u. Kirchengeschichie 
des Mittelalters. pp. 402-469, and 584-624. 

2 See above, 

3 de Ghellinck, op. cit. pp. 130-148. 

* de Ghellinck — The Liber Sententiarum. Dublin Review, CXLVI. Jan. 
1910. p. 157. 

s Lib. IV. Dist. V. 3. 

® Paul Fournier, Deux controverses sur les origines du Decret de Gratien. 
p. 114, and note 2. Revue d'Histoire et de Litt^rature religieuses. IIL 1898. 

' de Ghellinck, Le Traits de Pierre Lombard sur les sept ordres ecclesias- 
tiques. Revue d'histoire ecclesiastique X. 1909. p. 722. n. i. 



PETER LOMBARD AND HIS TEXT-BOOK 65 

The patristic authorities, which the Lombard cites in defence 
of every point in his arguments, he found mostly in the "Sic et 
Non" and in Gratian's "Decretum." It is probable that the 
gathering of many of the quotations from the Fathers in the "Sic 
et Non" was the fruit of Abelard's own reading, but certainly 
there were others in that period who were working at the same 
task.^ Alger of Liege had also put together texts from patristic 
writings in his "Sentences," which were an aid to Peter Lom- 
bard's work, and some of which were incorporated in Gratian's 
"Decretum." 

The frequently repeated phrase, "We are often asked" shows 
that Peter was considering all the questions and opinions of his 
age on the points in question and attempting to harmonize them. 
On the whole, he succeeds in remaining rigorously orthodox, but 
there was opposition to some of his views during his life-time and 
after. The Third Council of the Lateran in 1 179, however, began 
one canon with "We believe with Peter Lombard." ^ In the thir- 
teenth century the Masters of Paris condemned several proposi- 
tions, which have since then been published at the end of the 
book.^ The Lombard's rather vaguely-stated conclusions were 
an advantage to the book when used as a text in the schools, for 
it encouraged questions and comments on it by both masters and 
students. 

The first book of the "Sentences" discusses the Trinity, the 
sacond the Creation and the Fall, the third the Incarnation, and 
the last the Sacraments and Eschatology. It is of course his dis- 
cussion of sacraments which here concerns us. 

Here much work had already been done by the theologians 
of the period, and Peter entered into their labors. In his "Sen- 



* de Ghellinck, The Liber Sententiarum. Dublin Review. Jan. 19 10. p. 149. 

de Ghellinck, Le Traits de Pierre Lombard sur les sept ordres eccl^sias- 

tiques: ses sources, ses copistes. Revue d'histoire eccl^siastique. X. 1909. p. 301. 

2 Cap. II. 2 (Mansi, v. XXII. p. 983. 

3 de Ghellinck, Le Mouvement th^ologique du Xlle Siecle, p. 163. 



66 PETER LOMBARD 

tences" Robert Pullus, the first English Cardinal, had given four 
of his eight books to a discussion of the sacraments, but his work 
was not systematically arranged, and a very slight comparison 
with Peter's shows what an advance the latter had made. His 
advance, however, was only possible by the help of the Cardinal's 
work. 

In the "Theologia" of Abelard, as in the books of Sentences 
by his followers, the sacraments had been discussed at length. In 
the "Sic et Non," too, questions relating to the sacraments had 
been raised, and both these^ had a marked influence on Peter's 
fourth book. 

Hugh of St. Victor's last work before his death in 1141 was 
the "De Sacramentis Fidei." Much of this had been taken over 
word for word by the "Summa Sententiarum" which quite cer- 
tainly is not by Hugh, but comes from his school. Originally, it 
had no tractates on the Last Things, on Orders or on Marriage. 
The tractate on Orders was taken from Ivo of Chartres, that on 
Marriage from Walter of Mortagne,^ but these had been added 
to the other tractates before the Lombard's study of the book, for 
he made use of them both. 

Fournier has made it certain that Gratian's "Decretum" was 
written before Peter Lombard's "Sentences," ^ and it is then quite 
clear that it was one of the sources for Peter's discussion of the 
sacraments. From the "Decretum" and from Abelard's "Sic et 
Non" Peter took the citations from patristic literature as "author- 
ities" for his argument. 

The Lombard transcribes literally passages from Hugh's "De 
Sacramentis" or from the "Summa" and adds citations of author- 
ities which he took from Gratian. To-day, such methods would 
lay him open immediately to the charge of plagiarism, but in the 
Middle Ages, this was a correct literary method. Passages from 
the Fathers are given under their own names, at least to the best 



^ de Ghellinck — The Liber Sententiarum. pp. 144-155. 

2 de Ghellinck — The Liber Sententiarum. p. 153. 

3 Paul Foumier, Deux controverses sur les origines du D^cret de Gratien. 
Revue d'Histoire et de Litt^rature religieuses. III. 1898. pp. 97-116, 253-280. 



PETER LOMBARD AND HIS TEXT-BOOK 67 

of his knowledge of them, but those from works of his contem- 
poraries quite anonymously.^ 

A few examples will make his method clearer. For his treat- 
ment of baptism, the Lombard is indebted to the "Summa," and 
to this he adds patristic quotations from the "Decretum." ^ For 
confirmation, he follows Hugh's "De Sacramentis." ^ 

The "Summa Sententiarum" is the basis for the Lombard's 
teaching on the Eucharist. Some of it is taken word for word, 
other parts are changed about, and citations and discussion added 
from Gratian. To Abelard he owes the statement that the Eu- 
charist is a memorial,^ but he refers to the institution as an his- 
torical event, only to show why it should be received fasting. On 
the Eucharist, the Summa is in agreement with Abelard, so that 
the Lombard does not need to consider Abelard's views also.^ 
Peter Lombard is evidently familiar with the contemporary writ- 
ings on the Eucharist, probably with that of Alger of Liege, 
and possibly with the work of Rupert of Deutz.^ The problem 
was already settled — the Berengarian controversy at the end of 
the eleventh century had completed the crystallization of the 
doctrine, and the Lombard had only to state the accepted view.^ 

In the discussion of penance and confession, however, Peter 
Lombard is obliged to unite several lines of development. There 
is still the ancient practice of penance which he finds in the quota- 
tions from the Fathers cited by Gratian, the newer conception of 
penance and confession as a sacrament, and the power of the 



^ de Ghellinck — Le Mouvement theologique. pp. 141-148. 

2 Otto Baltzer, Die Sentenzen des Petrus Lombardus. Ihre Quellen und ihre 
dogmengeschichtliche Bedeutung. Studien zur Geschichte der Theologie und 
der Kirche. Bd. VIII. Heft. 3. 1902. pp. 124-128. 

' Ibid. pp. 128-129. 

* Dist. VIII. 3. 

« Ibid. pp. 129-135. 

•Died at Deutz, now part of Cologne, March 4, 1135. In iiii he wrote 
his twelve books, De divinis officiis. He was a Platonizing mystic whose Euchar- 
istic doctrine was the subject of a long dispute by the Maurists and by Bel- 
larmine, in which his orthodoxy was alternately attacked and defended. 

' Ibid. pp. 129-135. 



68 PETER LOMBARD 

keys.^ On the conception of penance as a sacrament the Lom- 
bard is still rather hesitant, but on the other points his develop- 
ment is clear. In his treatment he again is influenced by Hugh 
of St. Victor, by the "Summa Sententiarum," but especially by 
Gratian, who in his "Decretum" devotes the long "Tractatus de 
Poenitentia" to the subject. Abelard, in this case, influences him 
indirectly through Gratian.^ 

The treatment of Extreme Unction follows the "Summa 
Sententiarum" and Hugh of St. Victor's "De Sacramentis," rear- 
ranged and combined with each other. ^ On the question of the 
repetition of the sacrament, he decides according to the practice 
of the day, which allowed it.* 

There is only vague conception of ordination as a sacrament 
before Peter Lombard's "Sentences," though St. Augustine men- 
tions it as a sacrament.^ In his "De Sacramentis." Hugh speaks 
vaguely of ordination among the sacraments which prepare for 
others. The "Epitome" does not mention it as a sacrament, and 
the "Summa" says in the chapter on the "Two Keys" that these 
are given to priests only, in the consecration by a bishop. The 
Lombard names it in the list of sacraments, but beyond that speaks 
of it as a sacrament, only because it is the "sign" of the grace 
given to the clergy.^ The rest of his treatment is devoted to a 
discussion of the seven orders, in which one finds with difficulty 
five lines that are original with him. From Gratian he took the 
canons relative to functions, from Hugh the example of Christ 
in fulfilling each of these orders, from Ivo of Chartres the cere- 
monies of ordination, and from Gratian the materials for the dis- 
cussion of ordination by heretics and simonists. In describing 
the ceremony of ordination, he forgot the laying-on of hands. ^ 

» Ibid. p. 135. 

2 Ibid. pp. 135-147- 

3 Ibid. pp. 147-148. 

* Ibid. p. 148. 

* Contra Epistolam Parmeniani. II. c. XIII. 28. 

•One of Augustine's definitions: a sacrament is a "sacred sign." De Civ, 
X. c. 5. 

' Ibid. pp. 148-151. 



PETER LOMBARD AND HIS TEXT-BOOK 69 

Ivo of Chartres' sermon, "Liber de sacris Ordinibus" seems to 
have come to Peter Lombard indirectly through the "Sentences" 
of Alger of Liege. ^ Isidore of Seville and Ivo of Chartres were 
also sources for Hugh's treatment of the seven orders, in a pas- 
sage which lacks the originality of other parts of his work.^ 

In the Distinctions on Matrimony, Peter Lombard at first 
depends on Hugh of St. Victor, but soon turns to the Canon Law^ 
side of the question, which he finds in Gratian. The sacramental 
significance of marriage, as a "sign of a sacred thing," the union 
of Christ and the Church, he finds in Hugh's treatise on the 
Sacraments.^ 

This is necessarily a mere sketch of the sources from which 
Peter Lombard gleaned his Distinctions on the sacraments, but it 
shows us quite clearly that his originality consists only in the suc- 
cessful compilation of materials ready to hand into a text-book 
useful for the Schools. 

5. THE Lombard's definition of sacrament 

We have already traced the history of the many attempts to 
define the conception of sacrament. Peter Lombard stands at 
the end of this long development, summing up the work of pre- 
ceding theologians, and giving his own definition, which with 
only slight changes in the wording was to be accepted for cen- 
turies. 

But even with this long development behind him, he works 
slowly and cautiously at his definition.* He starts with the defini- 
tion of Augustine — "A sacrament is the sign of a sacred thing." ^ 
To this he adds the definition of Berengar, attributed to St. 
Augustine — "A sacrament is the visible form of invisible grace." ^ 



* de Ghellinck, Le Traite de Pierre Lombard sur les sept ordres eccl&ias- 
tiques. Revue d'histoire eccl^siastique. X. 1909. p. 302. 

* Ibid. pp. 290-302, 720-726. vol. XL 1910. pp. 29-46. 
^ Baltzer, op. cit. pp. 1 51-159. 

*Lib. IV. Dist. L 

•August. X. de Civ. Dei. c. 5 and II contra Adversar. Legis et Prophet. 

c. 9. n. 34. 

* Berengar, De Sacra Coena (ed. A. F. and F. Th. Vischer.) p. 1 14. 



70 PETER LOMBARD 

Some signs, he continues, are natural, as smoke signifying fire, 
others conventional. And of these conventional signs some are 
sacraments, some not. For every sacrament is a sign, but not 
conversely. Like Augustine, he insists that a sacrament must 
have the likeness of that of which it is the sacrament.^ These 
ideas he sums up in his definition — "For that is properly called a 
sacrament, which is in such a manner the sign of the grace of God, 
and the form of invisible grace, that it bears its image (i.e. sig- 
nifies it), and is its cause. ^ Sacraments therefore were instituted 
not only for the sake of signifying, but also of sanctifying. Those 
which were instituted only for the sake of signifying, are only 
signs and not sacraments." ^ He emphasizes this power of the 
sacrament to sanctify, in a later passage: "Every evangelical 
sacrament accomplishes that which it figures." * 

But Peter Lombard's definition is almost as interesting for 
what it does not say as for what it does. We have seen that his 
"Sentences" were much influenced by Hugh of St. Victor's "De 
Sacramentis" and by the anonymous "Summa Sententiarum." 
And yet in the definition of sacrament, he does not borrow their 
most characteristic statements. Hugh of St. Victor had said **A 
sacrament is a corporeal or material element sensibly presented 
from without, representing from its likeness, signifying from its 
institution, and containing from sanctification some invisible and 
spiritual grace." ^ The Lombard's definition has the advantage of 
being more elastic, for it allows the application of the term sacra- 
ment to penance and marriage, which are not bound to a corporeal 
or material element.^ The definition which the "Summa" gives 



* Augustine, Ep. 98. (alias 23.) 

2 Thomas Aquinas says of this — "The sign of a sacred thing in so far as it 
sanctifies men" — Signum rei sacrae in quantum est sanctificans homines (III, 
Q. Ix, a. 2.) 

3 Dist. I. 2. 

* Dist. XXII. 3. 

6 De Sac. Lib. I. P. IX. c. II. 

«G. L. Hahn, Die Lehre von den Sakramenten in ihrer geschichtlichen 
Entwickelimg innerhalb der abendlandischen Kirche bis zum Concil von Trient. 
1864. p. 18. 



PETER LOMBARD AND HIS TEXT-BOOK 71 

is perhaps a little clearer than Peter's in the statement that the 
sacrament confers the grace — "A sacrament is the visible form of 
invisible grace gathered therein, which the sacrament itself con- 
fers ; for it is not only the sign of a sacred thing, but also the effi- 
cacy." ^ 

The number of the sacraments was naturally influenced by 
the growing definiteness of the conception of sacrament. Many 
ceremonies that could be called sacraments under the vague defini- 
tion of Augustine: "The sign of a sacred thing," could no longer 
be so called when a more definite conception of the term had been 
developed. 

Peter Lombard enumerates seven^ : Baptism, Confirmation, 
the blessing of bread, that is, the Eucharist, Penance, Extreme 
Unction, Ordination and Marriage. In stating this, he lays no 
claim to anything new. All of these had been called sacraments 
before the Lombard's time. Peter Lombard probably used the 
"Summa" after the tractate on Marriage by Walter of Mortagne, 
and that on Orders by Ivo of Chartres had been added to it,^ and 
in this there was practically a recognition of the seven, though 
Ordination is only spoken of as the power of the keys which is 
conferred through consecration by the bishop. A clearer example 
of the enumeration of the sacraments as seven in number is found 
in the "Sententiae Divinitatis," which divides them into two cate- 
gories, those which are generally common to all, as baptism, the 
laying-on of hands, penance, the body and blood of Christ, and 
the solemn unction of the sick, and those which are not common, 
as marriage, and holy orders.** 



^ Summa Sententiarum. Tract. IV. c. I. 

2 Dist. II. I. 

3 Realencyklopadie. Sakrament. (F. Kattenbusch.) Bd. 17. p. 359. 

^ de Ghellinck — ^A propos de quelques affirmations du nombre septenaire 
des sacrements au Xlle si^le. Recherches de science religieuse. I. 1910. pp. 

493-497. 

"Mais I'inter^t de ce texte r&ide avant tout dans son anteriority sur Pierre 
Lombard, qu'a la suite de I'ouvrage de Hahn, Ton repr^sente habituellement 
comme le premier temoin clair et net du nombre septenaire." Cf. Hahn, op. cit. 
p. 107. 



y^ PETER LOMBARD 

It is evident, however, that the sacredness of the number 
seven^ had a marked influence on this enumeration. Both here 
and in the list of the orders of clergy, we can see the anxiety of 
the medieval theologians to fit their systems in with the sacred 
number. 

That the fixing of the number of the sacraments at seven 
was still quite a new idea is shown by the slowness of its accept- 
ance. The Third Lateran Council in 1179 speaks of the induc- 
tion of ecclesiastical persons to their seats, the instituting of 
priests, the burying of the dead and the blessing of marriages as 
sacraments.^ This is the more surprising, as the Council was 
held under Pope Alexander III, who as Roland Bandinelli, in his 
"Sentences," had enumerated baptism, confirmation, the sacra- 
ment of the altar, penance, unction and matrimony, and in con- 
nection with the unction had treated of the keys which a man 
receives at the same time with sacerdotal ordination.^ 

The Lombard's enumeration, however, was soon accepted, 
and the acceptance of it was probably influenced by the sacredness 
of the number seven. 

6. THE LOMBARD ON THE WORKING OF THE SACRAMENTS 

We have seen that in the treatment of the definition and 
number of the sacraments, Peter Lombard stands at the end of 
a long development. His position in regard to the doctrine of 
the working of the Sacraments is quite in contrast to this. The 
simplicity of his treatment is that of the early Middle Ages, for in 



*The sacredness of the number seven can be traced back to the Baby- 
lonians. Cf. the legend of the seven evil demons. (See Rogers, Cuneiform 
Parallels, pp. 63 ff.) 

* c. 7. (Mansi. XXII. 222 A.) Et vel pro perso is ecclesiasticis deducendis 
ad sedem, vel sacerdotibus instituendis, aut mortuis sepeliendis, seu etiam nuben- 
tibus benedicendis, seu etiara aliis sacramentis 

'Gietl — Die Sentenzen Rolands, p. 268. Traduntur autem he claves in 
promocione sacerdocii per ministerium episcopi. Cum enim recipit ordinem 
sacerdotalem, simul et has claves recipit. 



PETER LOMBARD AND HIS TEXT-BOOK 73 

the discussion of the effect of the various sacraments on the wor- 
shipper there had been Httle or no advance since St. Augustine.* 
In the century following the Lombard there were to be long dis- 
cussions of the "materials" of the sacraments or the "elements," 
to use St. Augustine's term ; of the "character" conferred on the 
worshipper, and of whether the sacraments worked "ex opere 
operato," that is, by virtue of the action, or "ex opere operantis," 
by reason of the agent. 

The Lombard sums up his teaching on the effect of baptism 
in one paragraph : "The purpose of the institution of Baptism is 
the renewing of the mind ; so that man who had been old through 
sin, might be renewed through the grace of baptism, which is 
accomplished by the putting off of sins and the taking on of 
virtues. For by this means anyone is made a new man, by effacing 
his sins and adorning himself with virtues. The effacement of 
sins drives out uncleanness; the acquisition of virtues conveys 
beauty, and this is the thing (res) of this sacrament, namely 
inward cleanness." ^ 

Of confirmation, Peter Lombard says only that in this sacra- 
ment, "The seven-fold grace of the . . . Spirit, with all full- 
ness of sanctity and virtue, comes upon a man." ^ "The Com- 
forter is given to the baptized person, that he may be strength- 
ened through the Holy Spirit to declare unto others that which 
he himself has obtained in Baptism." * 

In his discussions of the working of several of the sacra- 
ments, it is interesting to note how the Lombard comes back to 
a comparison of the sacrament, of which he is speaking, to bap- 
tism. So in his treatment of the Eucharist : "Through Baptism 
we are cleansed, through the Eucharist we are made complete in 
what is good. Baptism extinguishes the fires of sin, the Eucha- 
rist restores us spiritually. Wherefore it is well called the Eu- 



* G. L. Hahn — Die Lehre von den Sakramenten in ihrer geschichtlichen 
Entwickelung, etc. p. 282. 

2 Lib. IV. Dist. III. 9. 

3 Dist. VII. 4. 
< Dist. VII. 3. 



74 PETER LOMBARD 

charist, that is, good grace, because in this sacrament there is 
not only an evidence of virtue and grace, but He who is the fount 
and source of all grace is there received entire." ^ In another 
Distinction he adds ; "Now this sacrament was instituted for two 
purposes : for the augmentation of virtue, that is, of charity, and 
for a remedy for daily weakness." ^ That Peter's doctrine of the 
working of the sacrament agrees with the Patristic view is shown 
by his acceptance of Augustine's : "And because we fall every day 
Christ is every day mystically immolated for us. For He gave 
us this sacrament of salvation, that since we sin daily, and He 
cannot die again, we may through this sacrament obtain remis- 
sion." 2 

Peter Lombard also parallels Penance with Baptism. "Pen- 
ance is necessary to those placed far from God, that they may 
approach Him. For it is . . . the second plank after ship- 
wreck. Because if anyone should, by sinning, have sullied the 
robe of innocence received in Baptism, he can restore it by the 
remedy of Penance. The first plank is Baptism, where the old 
man is laid aside, and the new is put on ; the second, Penance, by 
which we rise again after a fall, while the old state, which had 
returned, is repelled, and the new one which had been lost is 
resumed. Those who fall after Baptism can be restored through 
Penance, but not through Baptism." ^ Furthermore, "Penance 
is not performed once only, but may be frequently repeated, and 
. . . through it pardon is frequently and repeatedly obtained." * 

As we have already noted, it was difficult for the Lombard to 
fit Ordination into the sacramental system. This is nowhere more 
clearly shown than in his attempt to state what is the effect of the 
sacrament on the one ordained. He can only say that, "Those 
in whose minds the seven-fold grace of the Holy Ghost is diffused, 
when they present themselves for ecclesiastical orders, in the 



1 Dist. VIII. I. 

2 Dist. XII. 8. 
'Dist. XIV. I. 
4 Dist. XIV. 4. 



PETER LOMBARD AND HIS TEXT-BOOK 75 

very advancement to the spiritual rank are believed to receive a 
fuller grace." ^ 

7. ADJUSTMENT OF PENANCE AND ORDINATION TO THE 
SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM BY THE LOMBARD 

The Lombard's rather hesitating treatment of penance and 
of ordination shows clearly that it was still a comparatively new 
thing to include them in the sacramental system. Following St. 
Augustine's distinction between the element and the word,^ he 
had spoken in baptism, confirmation and the Eucharist of the 
"form" of the sacrament, the "word" which, added to the element, 
made the sacrament. It is striking, then, to find that neither in 
Penance, nor in Ordination does he discuss the form of the sacra- 
ment. 

He speaks of Ordination as a sacrament because "it is a 
sign, that is, something sacred, in which spiritual power is given 
to the one ordained ; and office." ^ In the discussion of baptism 
and of the Eucharist he had distinguished between the sacrament 
and the thing (res) of the sacrament, the spiritual, essential part 
of the ceremony or service, signified by the sacrament or outward 
sign. But this distinction he does not make in his treatment of 
Ordination. There is still a difficulty in fitting Ordination into the 
sacramental system. 

There is a greater difficulty in including penance in the sys- 
tem, and we see this most clearly in his attempt to define what is 
the thing (res) of the sacrament of penance. "It remains to 
inquire which is the sacrament in the act of penance and which 
its *res.' For a sacrament is the sign of a sacred thing. What 
then is the sign here ? Some say . . . that the sacrament here 
is what is only done outwardly, namely the outward penance 
which is the sign of the inward, that is, of contrition of the heart 
and of humility. . . . Also, if the outward penance is the sacra- 



1 Dist. XXIV. I. 

2 August. In Joannem Tract. LXXX. n. 3. 

3 Dist. XXIV. 10. 



76 PETER LOMBARD 

ment and the inward its 'res,' the latter precedes the sacrament 
oftener than the sacrament precedes it. . . . But some say that 
the outward penance is also the inward sacrament and not two 
sacraments, but one, as the forms of bread and wine are not two 
sacraments but one. And as in the sacrament of the Body, so 
also in this sacrament, they say that one thing, namely the out- 
ward penance, is the sacrament alone, another the sacrament and 
the *res,' namely the inward penance,^ and still another the *res* 
and not the sacrament, namely, the remission of sins. For the 
inward Penance^ is also the *res' of the sacrament, that is, of the 
outward Penance, and the sacrament of the remission of sin which 
it symbolizes and causes. The outward Penance is also the sign 
of the inward and of the remission of sins." ^ 

This is certainly not very clear as one reads it, and one 
fancies it was not very clear to the Lombard either, as he struggled 
with the new problem of making penance suit the requirements 
of a sacrament, as it was now closely defined. 

8. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE ''SENTENCES*' 

Let us conclude with a few words on the historical signifi- 
cance of Peter Lombard's work. He did not create anything, and 
his ideas, unlike those of Abelard, did not have the merit of orig- 
inality.^ Seeberg says, "Really, the only feature which challenges 
our admiration is the consistent development of the doctrine of 
the sacraments, and here Gratian had already led the way. But it 
was not only the commendable features of the work, but in even 
greater degree its faults, that won for it the unique historical 
position which it came to occupy." * 

The Middle Ages needed a theological compendium and 
Peter Lombard gave the best in this period. He had a gift for 
compilation and system, and for conciseness and clearness. With 
the exception of a few statements he was rigorously orthodox. 



^ Poenitentia. 

2 Dist. XXII. 3. 

3 Protois, Pierre Lombard, p. 40. 

^ Seeberg, History of Dogmas (tr. Hay) vol. II. p. 63. 



PETER LOMBARD AND HIS TEXT-BOOK yj 

and his orthodoxy secured the almost immediate success of his 
work. The impersonal treatment made it suitable for commen- 
tary by professor and student, and so made it invaluable as a text- 
book. The very fact that he had not drawn definite conclusions 
encouraged study of the problems he presented. 

Its success was not complete for half a century, but mean- 
while it passed quickly from Paris into Germany, England, Italy 
and the Low Countries. There were many commentaries on the 
"Sentences" by theologians of all schools of thought — Thomists>. 
Scotists, Occamists, Augustinians — by all the doctors, in fact. 
Roger Bacon complains in 1267 that interpretations of the ** Sen- 
tences" put those of Scripture in the shade. Erasmus said there 
were as many commentaries on the "Sentences" as there were 
theologians.^ There was even a special degree conferred on those 
who had completed their study of the book : Bachalarius Senten- 
tiarus. It is not till the end of the fifteenth century that we 
notice the slow but gradual disappearance of the "Libri Quatuor 
Sententiarum." 

De Ghellinck's praise is certainly most generous : "The work 
of Peter Lombard must remain in the theological past as the 
crowning work of several centuries of elaboration and as the 
corner-stone of all that has since been achieved in Catholic 
theology. . . . Those who have made progress have only 
achieved it aided by the work of the Lombard who prepared the 
way for them." 



^ "There are as many commentaries on the 'Sentences' of Petrus Lombardus 
as there are theologians. There is no end of little summas, which mix up one 
thing with another over and over again and after the manner of apothecaries 
fabricate and refabricate old things from new, new from old, one from many^ 
and many from one." Letter to Volzius in 1518, afterward published as preface 
to the new edition of the Enchiridion. (Quoted by Emerton, Desiderius Eras- 
mus, p. III.) 



NOTE ON THE TRANSLATION 

Distinctions I-XXVI (earlier chapters) of the Fourth Book 
of Peter Lombard's "Sentences," which deal with the Sacra- 
ments, have been translated from the Latin, in the hope that they 
may be of use to some readers. My work has been painstakingly 
criticized and corrected by Dr. Louise R. Loomis, but I only am 
responsible for its errors, especially in the few passages where I 
ventured to disagree with her. 

Poenitentia has been translated penance throughout, in 
accordance with Roman Catholic usage. Res presented much 
more serious difficulties. In the end, it was translated, in nearly 
♦every case, thing, and it has been left to the reader to learn the 
♦^content of the Latin word. Other translations were suited to 
«only a few uses of the word, or else seemed to interfere with 
.accepted philosophic terms. The only other alternative was to 
leave it untranslated, as Harnack does, in his "History of 
Dogma." 

The Biblical references and quotations are according to the 
]Douay version, which in some instances differs from the King 
jjames Version. 



APPENDIX 



TRANSLATION OF BOOK IV, DISTINCTIONS I-XXVI 

OF THE QUATUOR LIBRI SENTENTIARUM 

OF PETER THE LOMBARD 

Distinction I 

PART I 

I. Of Sacraments 

The Samaritan who tended the wounded man, applied for his 
relief the dressings of the sacraments,^ just as God instituted the 
remedies of the sacraments against the wounds of original and actual 
sin. Concerning the sacraments, four questions first present them- 
selves for consideration : what a sacrament is, why it was instituted ; 
wherein it consists, and how it is performed; and what the differ- 
ence is between the sacraments of the old and the new covenants. 

n. What a Sacrament is. 

"A sacrament is the sign of a sacred thing (res)." ^ However, a 
sacred mystery is also called a sacrament, as the sacrament of di- 
vinity, so that a sacrament may be the sign of something sacred, and 
the sacred thing signified; but now we are considering a sacrament 
as a sign. — So, *'A sacrament is the visible form of an invisible 
grace." ^ 

III. What a sign is. 

"But a sign, is the thing (res) behind the form which it wears to 
the senses, which brings by means of itself something else to our 
minds." * 



1 Cf. Luke 10, 30. 

2 August., X. de Civ. Dei c. 5, and II. contra Adversar. Legis et Prophet, 
c. 9. n. 34- 

3 Berengar, De Sacra Coena. (See August., III. Quaestion. in Pentateuch. 

q. 84.) 

* August., II. de Doctr. christ. c. i. n. i. 

79 



8o APPENDIX 

IV. How a sign and a Sacrament differ. 

''Furthermore, some signs are natural, as smoke which signifies 
fire ; others conventional f' ^ and of those which are conventional, 
some are sacraments, some not. For every sacrament is a sign, but 
the converse is not true. A sacrament bears a resemblance to the 
thing, of which it is a sign. "For if sacraments did not bear a re- 
semblance to the things of which they are the sacraments, they could 
not properly be called sacraments." For a sacrament is properly so 
called, because it is a sign of the grace of God and the expression 
of invisible grace, so that it bears its image and is its cause. Sacra- 
ments, therefore, were not instituted merely in order to signify some- 
thing, but also as a means of sanctification. For things which were 
instituted only to signify are signs only, and not sacraments; such 
as the sacrifices of flesh, and the ceremonial observances of the old 
law, which could never justify those who offered them; because, as 
the apostle says,^ "The blood of goats and of oxen and the ashes of 
an heifer, being sprinkled, sanctify such as are defiled, to the cleans- 
ing of the flesh," but not of the spirit. Now this uncleanness was 
the touching of a dead body. Wherefore Augustine^ : "By that 
defilement which the law cleanses I understand merely the touching 
of a dead body, since anyone who had touched one, was unclean 
seven days; but he was purified according to the law on the third day 
and on the seventh, and was cleansed," so that he might enter the 
temple. These legal observances also cleansed sometimes from 
bodily leprosy; but no one was ever justified by the works of the 
Law, as says the apostle^, even if he performed them in faith and 
charity. Why ? because God has ordained them unto servitude, not 
unto justification, so that they might be types of something to come, 
wishing that these offerings should be made to him rather than to 
idols. They therefore were signs, yet also sacraments, although they 
are often called so incorrectly in the Scriptures, because they were 
rather signs of a sacred thing than availing anything themselves. 



1 August., II. de Doctr. christ. c. i. n. 2. The following is from August;, 
Epist. 98 (alias 23) ad Bonifacium episc". n. 9. 

2 Hebrews 9, 13; above on sacrifices, etc.. Lev. 16, 15. 

3 Libr. IV. Quaestion. in Pentateuch, q. 33. n. 10. 

* Rom. 3, 20: Gal. 2, 16. Also see Rom. 5, 14: "Adam, who is a figure of 
him who was to come." 



DISTINCTION I 8i 

These moreover the apostle^ calls works of the Law, which were 
instituted only to signify something, or as a yoke. 

V. Why the Sacraments were instituted. 

The sacraments were instituted for a three-fold reason: for 
humility, instruction, and exercise. For humility, so that while man, 
by order of the Creator, abases himself in worship before insensible 
things, which by nature are beneath him, through this humility and 
obedience, he may become more pleasing to God, and more meri- 
torious in his sight, at whose command he seeks salvation in things 
beneath him, yet not from them, but through them from God. For 
instruction also were the sacraments instituted, so that the mind 
might be taught by what it sees outside in visible form, to recog- 
nize the invisible virtue which is within. For man, who before sin 
saw God without a mediator, through sin has became so dulled that 
he is in no wise able to comprehend divine things, unless trained 
thereto by human things. — ^Likewise, the sacraments were instituted 
for exercise, because since man cannot be idle, there is offered him 
in the sacraments a useful and safe exercise by which he may avoid 
vain and harmful occupation. For he who devotes himself to good 
exercise is not easily caught by the tempter; wherefore Jerome^ 
warns us: "Always do some sort of work, that the devil may find 
you occupied." "There are, moreover, three kinds of exercises: 
one aims at the edification of the soul, another aims at the nourish- 
ment of the body, another at the destruction of both.'' — And inas- 
much as without a sacrament, to which God has not limited his 
power, he could have given grace to man, he has for the aforesaid 
reasons instituted the sacraments. "There are two parts of which 
a sacrament consists, namely words and things: words, as the invoca- 
tion of the Trinity; things, as water, oil, and the like." 

VI. Of the difference between the old and the new Sacraments. 

Now it remains to note the difference between the old and the 
new sacraments; as we call sacraments what anciently they called 



1 Rom. 3, 20; Gal. 2, 16; Acts 15, 10. 

2 Epist. 125. (alias 4.) ad Rustic, n. 11. — This chapter and the two passages 
following are taken from the Sum. Sent. tr. 4. c. 1. and Hugh of St. Victor, I. de 
Sacram. p. IX. c. 3. 



82 APPENDIX 

sacred things, such as sacrifices and oblations and the like. The 
difference between these Augustine* indicated briefly when he said, 
'^because the former only promised and signified salvation, while the 
latter give it." 

PART II 

VII. Of Circumcision, 

However there was among these sacraments one sacrament, 
namely that of circumcision, which conferred the remedy against 
sin which baptism now provides. Wherefore Augustine^ : "From 
the time circumcision was instituted among the people of God, which 
was then a sign of the justification of faith, it had power to cleanse 
old and young from original and previous sin ; just as baptism from 
the time it was instituted, began to have power to renew a man.'* 
So Bede^: "Under the Law circumcision brought the same aid, a 
health-bringing cure for the wound of original sin, which baptism 
has given during the time of revealed grace, except that the men of 
old were not yet able to enter the door of the heavenly kingdom; 
however being comforted after death by blessed rest in the bosom 
of Abraham, they awaited with happy hope their entrance into 
celestial peace." — By these passages we are clearly taught that cir- 
cumcision, from the time it was instituted, was ordained by God for 
the remission of original and actual sin in children and adults, just 
as now remission is given by baptism. 

VIII. What remedy those had who lived before circumcision. 

We ask now of the men who lived before circumcision, and of 
the women who lived before and after, what remedy they had 
against sin. Some say, that sacrifices and oblations were efficacious 
for them for the remission of their sin. But it is better to say that 
the men who sprang from Abraham were justified by circumcision, 
and the women by faith and good works, either their own, if they 
were adults, or their parents', if children. As for those who lived 
before circumcision, the children were justified by the faith of their 
parents ; parents on the other hand were justified by the efficacy of 



1 Enarrat. in Ps. 73. n. 2. 

' Libr. II. de Nuptiis et concupisc. c. 11. n. 24, and Gratian, C. Ex quo (6.), 
de Consecrat. dist. 4. See Rom. 4, 25. 

' Homil. 10 (on Luke 2) in Circumcis. Domini. 



DISTINCTION I 83 

sacrifices, that is, by that which they apprehended spiritually in these 
sacrifices. Wherefore Gregory^ : ''That which is accomplished in 
our time by the water of baptism, was effected in the time of the 
ancients by faith alone for children, or by the efficacy of sacrifice 
for their elders, or by the mystery of circumcision for those who 
sprang from the stock of Abraham." 

IX. Of the institution and purpose of circumcision. 

Here we must tell when circumcision was instituted ; and why; 
and why it was changed into baptism. — Abraham first received^ the 
command for circumcision as a test of obedience; nor of him alone 
was circumcision required but of his seed, that is, of all the Hebrews ; 
which circumcision was performed according to the Law on the 
eighth day with a stone knife in the flesh of the foreskin. More- 
over circumcision was ordained for many reasons, namely, that 
Abraham by his obedience to the command might please God, whom 
Adam had displeased by untruthfulness. Also it was ordained as a 
sign of the great faith of Abraham, who believed that he would have 
a son in whom all should be blessed. Next, it was instituted, that 
by this sign, this people might be distinguished from other nations. 
In the flesh of the foreskin also circumcision was commanded to be 
performed, because it was instituted as a remedy for original sin, 
which we inherit from our parents through concupiscence, which dis- 
plays itself especially in this part. And because in this part the first 
man knew the guilt of disobedience, it is proper that there he should 
receive the sign of obedience. 

It was performed on the eighth day with a stone knife, because 
both in the general resurrection in the eighth age to come, all cor- 
ruption will be removed from the elect by the rock Christ, and by the 
resurrection of Christ which took place on the eighth day, the soul 
of whomsoever believeth on him is circumcised from sins : "There are 
therefore two parts (res) of this sacrament." ^ 



^ Libr. IV. Moral, c. 3. in the preface; and Gratian, C. Quod autem (5.), de 
Consecrat. dist. 4. 

2 Cf. Gen. 17, 10 f.; Joshua 5, 2 f. — This whole chapter is taken from the 
Glossa ad Rom. 4, 10; Gen. 17, 10, and John 7, 22. 

3 Summa Sent. tr. 4. c. i for all of the second part of this distinction. This 
last proposition the Summa took from August., tr. 30. in loan. n. 5. 



84 APPENDIX 

Circumcision was changed to baptism on this account, because 
the sacrament of baptism is more general and more perfect, because 
increased by more abundant grace. For in circumcision only sins 
were remitted, but neither grace as an aid to good works, nor the 
possession or increase of virtues was obtained, as in baptism, where 
not only are sins removed, but also grace as an aid is conferred and 
virtues are increased. Hence it is called the water of refreshment,^ 
because it makes the barren fruitful and endows the fruitful with 
larger productiveness; because however just any person comes to 
Baptism, through the faith and charity he already has, he there 
receives richer grace ; but this is not so in circumcision. Wherefore 
to Abraham who was already justified by faith, it was only a sign, 
it bestowed nothing upon him inwardly. 

X. Of children who die before the eighth day, when circumcision 
was performed. 

If next we ask of the children who died before the eighth day, 
before which under the Law circumcision was not performed, 
whether they were saved or not ; the same answer can be made as is 
made for children who die before baptism, who, it is certain, perish. 
Hence Beda:^ "Who now in his Gospel terribly and profitably de- 
clares, ^Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he 
cannot enter into the kingdom of God' ;^ he also declared previously 
in his Law, *A male the flesh of whose foreskin is not circumcised, 
that soul shall be cut off from his people, because he made my cove- 
nant of no effect.** Mayhap however, under the Law, in face of the 
approach of death they circumcised their sons without sin before 
the eighth day, just as now Baptism is administered in the church.'* 



* Loco supra cit. Also Comment, in Luc. 2. 

* Cf. Ps. 22, 2. See on this, the Glossa interlinearis. 
9 John 3, 5. 

* Gen. 17, 14. 



Distinction II 

I. Of the sacraments of the new law. 

Let us now come to the sacraments of the new covenant ; which 
are baptism, confirmation, the blessing of bread, that is the eucharist, 
penance, extreme unction, ordination, marriage.^ Of these some 
offer a remedy for sin, and confer helping grace, as baptism ; others 
are merely a remedy, as marriage ; others strengthen us with grace 
and virtue, as the eucharist and ordination. 

If indeed we are asked why these sacraments were not insti- 
tuted immediately after the fall of man, since in them are justifica- 
tion and salvation; we say that before the advent of Christ, who 
brought grace, the sacraments of grace could not be granted, for they 
have derived their virtue from his death and passion. Now Christ 
was unwilling to come before man was convinced that he could find 
help in neither natural nor written law. 

Marriage, however^ was instituted before sin, "not at all as a 
remedy, but as a sacrament and a duty" ; after sin indeed it became 
a remedy against the corruption of carnal concupiscence; of which 
we will treat in its place.^ 

II. Of baptism. 

Now let us consider the sacrament of baptism, "which is first 
among the sacraments of the new grace. The baptism of Christ, 
John foretold by his own baptism, and he is said to have been the 
first to perform baptism, but in water, not in the Spirit, as he him- 
self says : 'I baptize you in water unto penance.' * He purified indeed 
only the bodies, he did not cleanse from sins." ^ 



^ Rest of this distinction taken almost wholly from Hugh of St. Victor's 
I. de Sacram. p. VIII. c. 3. Cf. Sum. Sent. tr. 5. c. i. See I. Cor. 10, 16. 

2 Hugh, ibid. c. 13. See Gen. 2, 24. 

3 See below, dist. XXVI. 
^ Poenitentia. 

5 Sum. Sent. loc. cit, — also for all that follows. See Matt, 3,11; Mark 1,8; 
Luke 3, 16; John i, 26; Acts i, 5. and 19, 4. 

85 



86 APPENDIX 

III. Of the difference between the baptism of John and that of 

Christ. 

The baptism of John was unto penance, not unto remission; 
whereas the baptism of Christ was unto remission; for John bap- 
tizing men called to penance, and those whom he baptized he taught 
to do penance, according to this passage: ''They came to John in 
the Jordan, confessing their sins." ^ But in the baptism of John sins 
were not remitted, as they are in the baptism of Christ. 

IV. Of what avail was the baptism of John? 

"What avail therefore had the baptism of John ? By the practice 
of baptism, it prepared men for the baptism of Christ." — But we ask, 
why is it called the baptism of John, as the Truth says : "The baptism 
of John, whence is it?" ^ Because the work of John there was only 
the visible one of washing the outside, not the invisible grace of God 
working within. Nevertheless this work of John was also from 
God and his baptism was from God, not from man; but it was 
called of man, because nothing was there done that man did not per- 
form. 

V. // his baptism was a sacrament. 

If indeed we are asked whether it was a sacrament; we may 
grant that it was, in the sense in which legal symbols are called sacra- 
ments. For the baptism of John signified a sacred thing, namely the 
baptism of Christ, which was not only to penance, but also to the 
remission of sins. 

VI. Of the form of the baptism of John. 

Here we must consider whether those baptized by John were 
again baptized with the baptism of Christ, and what form of words 
John used. — Those who were baptized by John, ignorant that the 
holy Spirit existed, and putting their hope in his baptism, were after- 
wards baptized with the baptism of Christ. — Also the baptism of 
John was performed in the name of the Coming One. So Jerome* 



* Matt. 3, 6; Mark i, 5. 

2 Matt. 21, 25. 

3 Comment, in loel c. 2. See also Acts 19, 4. and 2. Cf. C. Aliud est (39.), 
de Consecrat. dist. 4. For the laying-on of hands on the baptized, see Acts 8, 17. 



DISTINCTION II 87 

on Joel: "He who says that be believes on Christ, and does not 
believe on the holy Spirit, has not yet clear eyes. Wherefore those 
baptized by John in the name of the Coming One, that is, of the Lord 
Jesus, because they said : 'But we have not heard if there be a holy 
Spirit', were baptized a second time, or rather they received the true 
baptism." But they who had not placed hope in the baptism of John, 
and believed on the Father and Son and holy Spirit, were not bap- 
tized afterwards,^ but received the holy Spirit by the laying-on of 
hands upon them by the apostles. Others again who did not so 
believe were baptized with the baptism of Christ, as we have said 
before. Hence Jerome^ : "Those who did not know the holy Spirit,, 
when they received the baptism of John, were baptized again," lest 
any one of the Jews or of the Gentiles should think that water with- 
out the holy Spirit could suffice for salvation. On this point also,. 
Ambrose^ in the first book on the holy Spirit: "Some denied that 
they knew the holy Spirit, since they said they were baptized with 
the baptism of John, who baptized in the name of the coming Jesus,, 
not in his own name. These therefore, because they were not bap- 
tized in the name of Christ nor with faith in the holy Spirit, could 
not have received the sacrament of baptism; they were therefore 
baptized in the name of Christ, nor was baptism repeated for them, 
but renewed." 



1 This opinion not usually accepted. See Bonaventura. Dist. II. Quaest. 

2 Epist. 69 (83.) ad Oceanum n. 6. 

^ Cap. c. 3. n. 41. 42, with some changes and omissions. 



Distinction III 

PART I 

I. What baptism is. 

In the next place we must consider what baptism is, and what 
its form is, and when it was instituted, and the cause of its institu- 
tion. — By baptism we mean an immersion, that is, an exterior cleans- 
ing of the body administered under a prescribed form of words. 
For if the cleansing takes place without the word, there is no sacra- 
ment, but with the addition of the word to the element, it becomes 
a sacrament; not that the element itself becomes the sacrament, but 
the cleansing performed in the element. Wherefore Augustine:* 
"Baptism is consecrated by the word ; take away the word, and what 
is water, except water? the word is added to the element, and it 
l)ecomes a sacrament. Whence is this great virtue of water, that it 
should touch the body and cleanse the heart, unless it be by the word 
working? not because the word is said, but because it is believed. 
For in the word itself the passing sound is one thing, the virtue 
remaining is another." Therefore the sacrament of baptism con- 
sists of two parts, namely the word and the element. So that even if 
other things are lacking which were instituted for the beautifying 
of the sacrament, it is none the less a true sacrament and sacred, 
provided there be present the word and the element. For both in 
this sacrament and in others some things are customarily done for 
the beautifying and honoring of the sacrament, some things for 
the substance and purpose of the sacrament. The word and the 
element are of the substance of this sacrament, the other things 
heighten its solemnity. 

II. Of the form of baptism. 

But what is this word, the addition of which to the element, 
makes the sacrament ? The Truth^ teaches you, what is the form of 



^ In loan. Evang. tr. 80. n. 3. and de Cataclysmo, c. 3. n. 3; C. Detrahe 
verbum (54.), c. i. q. i. 
2 Matt. 28, 19. 

88 



DISTINCTION III 89 

this sacrament when he says to the disciples: "Go ye, teach all 
nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, 
and of the holy Spirit." Therefore the invocation of the Trinity is 
given as the word, by which baptism is consecrated ; and this is the 
form of words with which baptism is administered. Wherefore 
Pope Zacharias^ says to Bishop Boniface: "It was most positively 
declared in the Synod of the Angles, that whoever was immersed 
without the invocation of the Trinity, did not have the sacrament of 
regeneration; a statement which is entirely true, because if anyone 
is immersed in the font of baptism without the invocation of the 
Trinity, he is not a complete Christian, unless he is baptized in the 
name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy Spirit." 

III. That the Apostles baptized in the name of Christ. 

Nevertheless we read in the Acts of the Apostles,^ that the 
Apostles baptized in the name of Christ; but in this name, as Am- 
brose^ explains, the whole Trinity is understood: "For when you 
say Christ, the Father is understood, by whom he was anointed, and 
he himself who was anointed, and the holy Spirit through whom he 
was anointed." Wherefore Pope Nicholas to the inquiries of the Bui- 
gars* : "You assert that many were baptized by a certain Jew ; and 
you ask what is to be done in that case. They certainly have been 
baptized, if they were baptized in the name of the holy Trinity or 
in the name of Christ, as we read in the Acts of the Apostles ; for it 
is one and the same thing, as Saint Ambrose explains." 

IV. // baptism can be administered in the name of the Father, or 

of the holy Spirit. 

Here we are asked whether Baptism would be valid, if it were 
administered in the name of the Father only, or of the holy Spirit, 
as when it is administered in the name of Christ. Ambrose^ seems 
to say, that if the mystery of the Trinity is accepted in faith, and but 
one person is named, the sacrament is complete; and conversely, if 



^ Can. In Synodo Anglotum (83.), de Consecrat. dist. 4. 

* Acts 8, 12. 

* I. de Spiritu S. c. 3. n. 44. 

*C A quodam ludaeo (24.) de Consecrat. dist. 4. 

* Loc. cit. n. 42. Following is from ibid. n. 43, the third, n. 44. 



90 APPENDIX 

three are named, and faith is not right concerning some one of them, 
the mystery is made void. For he says thus: "Where there is not 
the complete sacrament of baptism, it is accounted neither a begin- 
ning nor any form of baptism. Now it is complete, if you confess 
the Father and Son and holy Spirit. If you deny one, you destroy 
the whole. Just as if you mention one in the (baptismal) formula, 
either Father, or Son, or holy Spirit, and in faith deny neither the 
Father nor the Son nor the holy Spirit, it is a complete sacrament of 
faith ; so also, although you say Father and Son and holy Spirit, and 
restrict the power of the Father and of the Son and of the holy 
Spirit, the whole mystery is void." "For when you say in the name 
of Christ, through the unity of the name the mystery is complete; 
nor is the Spirit absent from the Baptism of Christ, because Christ 
baptized in the Spirit." i 

"Now let us consider, whether, as we read that the sacrament 
of baptism is complete in the name of Christ, so also if we name only 
the holy Spirit, nothing is lacking to fulfil the mystery. Let us 
follow the reasoning : whoever has named one, has signified the Trin- 
ity-; if you say Christ, you designate also the Father, by whom the 
Son was anointed, and him who was anointed, that is, the Son, and 
the Spirit with whom he was anointed. For it is written :^ 'This 
Jesus of Nazareth, whom God anointed with the holy Spirit.' And if 
you name the Father, you indicate equally his Son and the Spirit of 
his mouth, provided that you include them also in your heart. And 
if you say the holy Spirit, you speak of God the Father from whom 
he proceeds and his Son, whose the Spirit is. Also, that authority 
may be added to reason, the Lord says :^ 'Moreover ye shall be bap- 
tized in the holy Spirit.'" By these words he shows that we can 
rightfully be baptized in the holy Spirit. 

From the above you have understood clearly that baptism can 
be administered in the name of Christ ; whence it seems no less to be 
implied that true baptism can be administered in the name of the 
Father alone, or of the holy Spirit alone, provided he who baptizes 
holds the faith of the Trinity, which Trinity is signified by any of 



ijohn I, 33; Acts I, 5. 

2 Acts 10, 38. 

3 Acts I, 5. 

On the exposition of Ambrose, cf. Bernard, Tract, de baptismo c. .2. n. 7. 



DISTINCTION III 91 

these names. But if anyone believing wrongly and intending to lead 
into error, mentions one only of the three, he does not fulfill the 
mystery. As for what Ambrose says, that the mystery is void even 
though the three are named, if he who baptizes lessens the power of 
the Father or of the Son or of the holy Spirit, that is if he thinks 
wrongly of the power of any one of these, not believing the power 
of the three is one; this must be understood of one who does not 
intend to baptize nor believe in baptizing, who not only lacks faith, 
but also has not the intention of baptizing. — Whoever therefore 
baptizes in the name of Christ, baptizes in the name of the Trinity, 
which is thereby understood. Nevertheless it is safer to name the 
three, so that we say : in the name of the Father and of the Son and 
of the holy Spirit; not in the names, but in the name, that is in 
invocation or in confession of the Father and of the Son and of the 
holy Spirit; for thereby the whole Trinity is invoked, that it may 
work invisibly through itself, just as outside visibly through the 
ministry. If however we say in the names, then it is not a sacrament, 
because the form of baptism is not preserved. 

PART II 

V. Of the institution of baptism. 

As for the institution of baptism, when it began, there are vari- 
ous opinions. Some say baptism was instituted, when Christ told 
Nicodemus r^ ''Unless a man be born again of water and of the holy 
Spirit," etc. Others say baptism was instituted when he said to the 
Apostles :2 "Go ye, teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of 
the Father and of the Son and of the holy Spirit." But this he said to 
them after the resurrection, in his instructions for the calling of the 
Gentiles, while before his passion he had sent them two by two to 
preach in Judea, and to baptize, with the words :^ "Go not aside into 
the way of the Gentiles." At that time therefore was baptism insti- 
tuted, because they then both preached and baptized. 

If now we are asked, under what form the apostles then bap- 
tized ; we can surely reply : in the name of the Trinity, that is, under 
the form which they baptized the Gentiles afterwards; for we caa 



1 John 3, 5. Cf. Hugh of St. Victor, II de Sacram. p. VI. c. 4. 

2 Matt. 28, 19. 

3 Matt. 10, 5. 



92 APPENDIX 

understand that it was given them before the passion, although it is 
not so recorded. Christ did not therefore first give them this form, 
when he sent them to evangelize the Gentiles; but rather the form 
which he had given before when he sent them into Judea, he after- 
ward repeated when he sent them to the Gentiles. — Accordingly it is 
more fitting to say that the institution was established, when Christ 
was baptized by John in the Jordan ; which he arranged, not because 
he wished to be cleansed,^ since he was without sin, but because "by 
the contact of his pure flesh he bestowed regenerating power on the 
waters," so that whoever was afterwards immersed, with the invoca- 
tion of the name of the Trinity, might be cleansed from sin. At that 
time therefore the baptism of Christ was instituted, by which the 
Trinity, whose mystery therein was made known, baptizes a man 
within. 

VI. Why it is performed in water only. 

Moreover this sacrament is. celebrated only in water, not in any 
other liquid, as Christ says : "Unless a man be born again of water," 
etc. And therefore we are directed to perform it uniformly in water, 
that we may understand that "just as water washes away uncleanness 
from the body and the garments, so baptism by purifying removes 
the stains of the soul and the uncleanness of vices." ^ Or for this 
reason, that poverty may excuse no one, as might happen if baptism 
were performed in wine or in oil, and in order that the common 
material for baptizing may be found everywhere; this is what the 
water, which flowed from the side of Christ, signified, just as blood 
was the sign of the other sacrament. Therefore baptism cannot be 
consecrated in any other liquid than water. 

VII. Of immersion, how many times it should be performed. 

If then we are asked how the immersion should be performed; 
we reply briefly, either once, or thrice, according to the varying cus- 
tom of the Church. So Gregory :^ "Concerning the trine immersion 



^ Matt. 3, i6; Mark i, 8; Luke 3, 22; John i, 27. For the passage which 

follows: C. Nunquam aquae (10.), de Consecrat. dist. 4. 

2 Ambrose, Comment, in Epist. ad Rom. 6, 4. (among Ambrose's works.) 
' I. Epistolar. indiction. 9. epist. 43. (alias 41.), (some parts omitted). Also, 

C. De trina mersione (80.), de Consecrat. dist. 4. 



DISTINCTION III 95 

of baptism, no truer answer can be given than what you yourselves- 
have already thought; that in the one faith of the holy Church 
diverse custom does no harm. For since in the three personalities 
there is one substance, there can be nothing reprehensible in immers- 
ing a child in baptism thrice or once, because in three immersions 
the Trinity of persons may be symbolized and in one the Unity of the 
Godhead. We indeed, who immerse thrice, also signify the sacra- 
ment of the three days' entombment." — According to this, it is 
allowable to immerse not only thrice, but also only once. However 
it is only allowable to immerse once, where such is the custom of the 
Church. If anyone should begin to do it where such was not the cus- 
tom, or should assert that there should be but one immersion, he 
would make himself reprehensible. Wherefore Haymo:^ ''Cyprian 
abounded in his understanding when he immersed children once in 
baptism, because what he understood, he carried out zealously, 
abounding in good works, although he ignorantly did wrong in this 
respect : But because he abounded in good works, afterwards, when 
he had been rebuked by God, he abounded in a higher understanding, 
immersing children thrice." — Here you have it that he did wrong, 
who immersed once ; but this was because the custom of his Church 
held otherwise, or because he asserted that only one immersion was 
allowable. As for the trine immersion Augustine says '? "After we 
professed to believe, we thrice plunged our heads into the sacred 
font, and this order of baptism is celebrated so as doubly to sym- 
bolize the mystery. Rightly were you immersed thrice, who received 
baptism in the name of the Trinity. Rightly immersed thrice be- 
cause you received baptism in the name of Christ, who rose from the 
dead on the third day. For immersion thrice repeated is a type of 
the Lord's sepulture." — Therefore it is settled, that those who are 
to be baptized should be immersed thrice; and yet if they are 
immersed only once, they receive a true baptism. And he who 
immerses only once does not sin, unless the custom of his Church is 
different, or unless he asserts that it should be done only in this way.^ 



^ Exposit. in Epist. ad Rom. 14, 5. 

* Senn. de Mysterio baptismi (among his works) ; and C. Postquam vos 
(78.), de Consecrat. dist. 4. 

» This and the preceding chapter from Sum. Sent. tr. 5. c. 4 and 10. (order 
changed somewhat.) 



94 APPENDIX 

VIII. When circumcision lost its power. 

Also we are frequently asked if circumcision lost its power 
immediately on the institution of baptism. — To this we reply that 
all commands of the law were terminated by the death of Christ. 
From that time therefore circumcision lost its power so that there- 
after it did not help ; it rather hindered those who performed it ; but 
until the oblation of the true host it was able to help. For if before 
the passion the commands of the law had come to an end, Christ 
would not, when the passion was imminent, have eaten the Passover 
with his disciples. 

IX. Of the cause of the institution of baptism. 

The purpose of the institution of baptism is the renewing of 
the mind, so that man who had been old through sin, might be 
renewed through the grace of baptism, which is accomplished by the 
putting off of sins and by the taking on of virtues. For by this 
means anyone is made a new man, by effacing his sins and adorning 
himself with virtues. The effacement of sins drives out unclean- 
ness, the acquisition of virtues conveys beauty, and this is the object 
(res) of this sacrament, namely inward cleanness. 

If we are asked, whether baptism has opened heaven, which 
circumcision did not open; we declare that neither baptism nor cir- 
cumcision opened to us an entrance to the kingdom, but the sacri- 
fice of the Saviour, and if that had been offered during the time of 
circumcision, the men of that time would have entered the kingdom. 
Therefore the object of this sacrament is justification. 



Distinction IV 

PART I 

I. Of those who receive the sacrament and the thing {res), and the 
thing and not the sacrament, and the sacrament and not the 
thing. 

Here we must say that some receive the sacrament and the thing, 
some the sacrament and not the thing, some the thing and not the 
sacrament. All infants receive the sacrament and the thing at the 
same time, who are cleansed in baptism from original sin ; although 
some deny that sins are forgiven to children who are about to die, 
and support this opinion by the word of Augustine t^ Sacraments 
accomplish what they symbolize in the elect only ; they do not under- 
stand that this must be interpreted: that, while the sacraments 
accomplish remission in others, they do not do it for them unto sal- 
vation, but only for the elect. For that in baptism sin is remitted 
to all infants, Augustine clearly says^: "From the new-born infant 
to the decrepit old man, just as no one is debarred from baptism, 
so there is no one who does not die to sin in baptism; but infants 
to original sin only, adults however to all sins which they have added 
to original sin by evil living," unless the enormity of their life 
prevents. Some also who are baptized with faith, receive the sacra- 
ment and the thing. 

II. Of those who receive it without sincerity. 

Those indeed who receive it without faith or without sincerity, 
receive the sacrament and not the thing. Wherefore Jerome^ : 
"There are the washings of Gentiles, heretics, but they do not 
wash unto salvation. In the church also those who do not receive 
baptism with full faith receive water but not the Spirit." Augustine'* 



* Seems to be gathered from Lib. II. de Peccator. meritis et remis. 27. n. 44. 
2 Enchirid. c. 43. n. 13; and C. A parvulo (134.), de Cons. dist. 4. 

' Lib. IV. Comment, in Ezech. c. 16. 4. 

* Enarrat. in Ps. 77. n. 2. 

95 



96 APPENDIX 

also says: "There were sacraments common to all Jews, but grace 
was not common to all, which is the virtue of sacraments, so now 
baptism is common to all baptized, but not the virtue of baptism, that 
is, grace itself." Likewise^ : "Everyone who already has become the 
master of his own will, when he comes to the sacrament of the faith- 
ful, unless he does penance for his old life, cannot begin a new. 
From this penance at baptism, children only are exempt." — By these 
and other testimonies it is clearly shown that the true grace of remis- 
sion is not conferred in baptism on adults without faith and penance, 
because remission is not given in baptism even to infants, who are not 
able to have their own faith, without the faith of another. If any- 
one therefore approaches without sincerity, not having true contri- 
tion of heart, he receives the sacrament without the thing. — Never- 
theless Augustine seems to say, that all sins are pardoned even to one 
who comes without sincerity, who even hates his brother in the very 
moment in which he is baptized, but that after baptism the sins 
immediately return ; but he does not make this as an assertion, but 
rather compares this view and the foregoing opinion. For he says 
thus :2 To those who "are baptized with a false heart, either their sins 
are in no wise remitted — because 'the holy Spirit of discipline will flee 
from the deceitful'^ — or else while remitted in that very moment of 
time by the strength of the sacrament, they are reimputed because of 
deceit ; so that also this may be true* : 'As many of you as were bap- 
tized in Christ,' etc., and this^ : *the holy Spirit of discipline will shun 
the deceitful' ; so that the sanctity of baptism adorns him with Christ, 
and the ruin of deceit deprives him of Christ." "For that sins re- 
mitted return, where there is not brotherly charity, the Lord also 
clearly teaches in the case of that servant from whom the Lord 
demanded the debt he had remitted, because he would not forgive his 



^ Serm. 351 (alias 50. among the homilies) c. 2. n. 2; and C. Omnis qui iam 
(96.), ibid. 

* I. de Baptismo contra Donatistas, c. 12. n. 19; also for the following pas- 
sages, j&rst n. 20; second ibid., below; third, n. 18; fourth, ibid., below. The first 
three are in C. Quomodo exaudit (41.), ibid. §6; the following, C. Ostenditur illos 
(32.), ibid. §2.; last, C. Tunc valere (42.), ibid. 

3 Wisdom I, 5. 

4 Gal. 3, 27. 

» Wisdom I, 5. 



DISTINCTION IV 97 

fellow-servant." "Thus the grace of baptism is not hindered from 
remitting all sins, even though brotherly hatred persists in the mind 
of him to whom they are forgiven. For yesterday is forgiven, and 
whatever remains over; and the very hour and moment before bap- 
tism are forgiven even in baptism. Then however the man begins 
immediately to be guilty not only of subsequent, but also of past days, 
hours and minutes, as all those sins which were remitted return." 
This, as we have said before, he does not make as an assertion ; as 
is shown from what he says in the same book, thus : "If an insincere 
man comes to baptism, his sins are forgiven him, or they are not for- 
given ; let them choose which they prefer." — You clearly discern, if 
you pay attention, that Augustine did not say it as an assertion, but 
as a question, and as a reference to the opinion of others. For he 
says the same: "Then baptism begins to have power for salvation, 
when the deceit departs in true confession, which, while the heart 
persevered in malice, did not allow cleansing of sins to take place." 
Therefore sins are not remitted to one who comes without sincerity. 

III. How this is to be understood: As many of you as were bap- 
tized in Christ, have put on Christ. 

We are asked therefore how this is to be taken :^ "As many of 
you as were baptized in Christ, have put on Christ." — We can say 
that those who are baptized in Christ, that is, in conformity with 
Christ, just as they die to their old sin, as Christ to the old penalty, 
put on Christ, whom through grace they have dwelling in them. It 
can be explained in another way : For in two ways we are said to put 
on Christ: either by the receiving of the sacrament or by the com- 
prehension of the thing. Wherefore Augustine :2 "Men put on 
Christ sometimes as far as receiving the sacrament, sometimes as 
far as sanctifying the life ; and the first may be true of the good and 
the bad ; the latter is the distinguishing characteristic of the good and 
the pious." All therefore who are baptized in the name of Christ, 
put on Christ either by the receiving of the sacrament, or by sancti- 
fication. 



* Rom. 6, 4. 

2 Lib. V. de Baptismo contra Donatistas, c. 24, n. 34; and C. Quomodo exaudit^ 
(41.) de Consecrat. dist. 4. §l. 



98 APPENDIX 

PART II 

IV. That suffering and faith and contrition take the place of 
baptism. 

There are also some, as we said above, who receive the thing 
and not the sacrament. For those who shed their blood for the name 
of Jesus, even if they do not receive the sacrament, receive the 
thing. Wherefore Augustine:^ "Whoever die for the confession of 
Christ, even though they have not received the washing of regen- 
eration, yet it suffices to remit their sins, as much as if they were 
washed in the sacred font of baptism."^ — You have heard that suffer- 
ing received for the name of Jesus takes the place of baptism. Not 
only does suffering take the place of baptism, but also faith and con- 
trition, when necessity prevents the sacrament, as Augustine clearly 
shows when he says:^ "The blessed Cyprian, in the fourth book on 
Baptism, thinks that what was said to the thief who had not been 
baptized : *This day shalt thou be with me in paradise,' ^ affords no 
slight proof that suffering sometimes takes the place of baptism. I 
have considered this repeatedly and find that not only suffering for 
the name of Christ, but even faith and turning of heart, can supply 
what was lacking by baptism, if by chance, owing to the shortness of 
time, a man cannot be succored by celebrating the mystery of bap- 
tism. Nor indeed was that thief crucified for the name of Christ, 
but for the sake of his crimes ; nor did he suffer, because he believed, 
but while he suffered, he believed. How much therefore can faith 
accompHsh, even without the sacrament of visible baptism — is shown 
in the case of that thief, as the Apostle says: 'With the heart we 
believe unto justice, but with the mouth confession is made unto 
salvation' ^ ; but this is accomplished invisibly, when not contempt 
for religion, but the pressure of necessity prevents the mystery of 
baptism." "And certainly baptism can take place when there is no 
turning of the heart; whereas turning of the heart can exist when 
baptism has not been received, but it cannot exist when baptism is 



1 Lib. XIII. de Civ. Dei, c. 7; cf. Bernard, tract, de Baptismo, c. 2. n. 8. 

2 Lib. IV. de Baptismo contra. Donatistas, c. 22. n. 29, and C. Baptismi 
vicem (34.) de Consecrat. dist. 4. 

Passage from Cyprian really Epist. ad lubaianum (73.), n. 22. 
« Luke 23, 43. 
* Rom. 10, 10. 



DISTINCTION IV 99 

despised ; nor can it in any way be called turning of the heart to God, 
when the sacrament of God is despised." ^ — So, here you have it, 
that not only suffering, but also faith and contrition confer remission, 
where the sacrament is not despised as is shown in the case of that 
thief, who not by suffering, but by faith was saved without baptism. 
— But some say that Augustine retracted this. He did indeed retract 
his example^ but not his opinion. For he says: "When I said in 
the fourth book that suffering can take the place of baptism, it was 
not enough that I mentioned the example of the thief, because it is 
uncertain that he was not baptized." It is established therefore that 
without baptism some are justified and saved. Wherefore iVmbrose^ 
on Valentinian : " 'My bowels are in pain,' to employ prophetic 
eloquence, because I have lost him whom I was about to regen- 
erate ; yet truly he did not lose the grace, which he sought." 

But there seems a contradiction to these views in what the 
Lord says :^ "Unless a man be born again of water and of the holy 
Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven." — For if this 
is generally true, the views expressed above do not seem to be true. 
But this is to be understood as applied to those who can be baptized 
and scorn it ; or else it is to be understood thus : unless a man be born 
again of water and of the holy Spirit, that is, by that regeneration, 
which is accomplished through water and the holy Spirit, he will not 
be saved. This regeneration moreover is accomplished not only 
through baptism, but also through penance and blood. Wherefore, 
the authority^ tells us, for this reason the Apostle said that "the 
foundation of baptism is plural, because there is baptism in water, 
in blood, and in penance." Moreover he does not say that the sacra- 
ment of baptism can be performed only in water, but that its virtue, 
that is, sanctification, can be given not only through water, but 
through blood or inner penance. Reason indeed urges this. For if 
baptism suffices for infants who are not able to believe, much more 
does faith suffice for adults willing but not able to be baptized. 



1 August., ibid. c. 25. n. 32, and Can. cit. §4. 

2 Lib. II. Retract, c. 18. Cf. Hugh of St. Victor, II. De Sacram. p. VI. c. 7. 

3 De Obitu Valentin, n. 29; cites from Jer. 4, 19. 

4 John 3, 5. 

^ Glossa in Hebr. 6, i (in Lyranus.) Opinion that of Rabanus, on this 
passage. 



loo APPENDIX 

Wherefore Augustine^: "Do you ask, which is greater: faith or 
water; I have no doubt what I should respond: faith. If therefore 
that which is less can sanctify, does not that which is greater? 
that is faith, of which Christ says: 'Whoever shall believe on me, 
though he were dead, yet shall he live.' ^ — But some say that no> 
adult believes on Christ or has charity without baptism, unless he 
sheds his blood for the Lord, supporting their view with the sub- 
joined testimonies. Augustine^ says: "From the time that the 
Saviour said ; 'Unless a man be born again of water and of the holy 
Spirit' etc., without the sacrament of baptism no one, except those 
who shed blood in the Church, can receive eternal life." The same : 
"We believe that no catechumen although dying in good works, has 
eternal life, except he die in martyrdom whereby the whole sacra- 
ments of baptism are completed." The same: "We believe that the 
way of salvation is only for the baptized." — But the statements he 
makes less fully here he supplements in the chapters quoted above ; 
and for that reason these passages are to be thus understood, that 
only those who have time to be baptized and are not, are excepted 
from salvation. For if anyone having faith and charity wishes to be 
baptized, and cannot because prevented by necessity, the goodness of 
the Almighty will supply what has been lacking in the sacrament. For 
while he can perform it, he is bound, unless he do perform it; 
but when he is not able, but wishes to do so, God, who has not bound 
his power to sacraments, does not impute it to him. But that there 
is invisible sanctification in some without the visible sacrament,. 
Augustine clearly teaches, saying in his commentary on Leviticus,^ 
"Invisible sanctification exists and benefits some without visible 
sacraments; but visible sanctification, which comes from the visible 
sacraments, can be present, but cannot benefit without the invisible. 
However the visible sacrament is not for that reason to be despised,, 
because the one who despises it, cannot be invisibly sanctified. 
Hence Cornelius and those with him were baptized, although al- 



* Passage in Augustine not found, but a like opinion in Hugh, I. De Sacram^ 
p. IX. c. 5. 

«John 11,25. 

' (Fulgent), de Fide ad Petrum. c. 3. n. 43. Following passage is in libro- 
Gennadii de Ecclesiast. Dogmat. c. 41, and C. Catechumenum (37.) de Consecrat. 
dist. 4. Third passage, ibid., a little below. 

* Lib. III. Quaestion. in Pentateuch, q. 84. (Levit. 21, 15.) 



DISTINCTION IV loi 

ready sanctified by the holy Spirit.^ Nor is the visible sanctification 
to be judged superfluous, because the invisible preceded it. There- 
fore the invisible sanctification without the visible can exist and 
benefit ; but the visible which is caused by the sacrament only, is not 
able to benefit without the invisible, since therein is its whole utility. 
Visible baptism did not benefit Simon Magus,^ because the invisible 
was lacking; but it benefited those in whom the invisible was pre- 
sent." Nor is another's faith so valuable to an infant, as his own to 
an adult. For the faith of the Church does not suffice for infants 
without the sacrament, because, if they die without baptism, even 
when they are being brought to baptism, they will be damned, as is 
proved by many authorities of the saints ; on this point let one suffice. 
Augustine^ : "Maintain firmly that infants who either begin to live in 
their mothers' wombs, and die there, or born of their mothers pass 
from this Hfe without the sacrament of baptism, must be punished 
with eternal torture, because although they have no sins of their 
own doing, yet they have inherited original sin from their conception 
in carnal concupiscence." And as infants who die without baptism, 
are numbered with the infidels, so those who are baptized are called 
faithful and are not separated from the fellowship of the faithful, 
when the Church prays for the faithful dead. They are faithful, 
therefore, not on account of their own virtue, but on account of the 
sacrament of faith. Wherefore Augustine :^ "An infant, although he 
has not yet that faith which depends upon the will of the believers, 
nevertheless has faith through the sacrament of that faith, that is, 
baptism; for as the response is made that he believes, so also he is 
called faithful, not because he assents to the truth by his own judg- 
ment, but because he receives the sacrament of that truth," 

V. What is the profit of baptism to those who come with faith. 

We are often asked concerning those who are already sanctified 
by the Spirit, and come to baptism with faith and charity, what 



* Acts lo, 44 f. 
a Acts 8, 13 f. 

3 (Fulgent.) De Fide ad Petrum. c. 27. n. 70, and C. Firmissime tene (3.), 
de Consecrat. dist. 4. 

* Epist. 98. (alias 23.) ad Bonifac. n. 10, and C. Nihil est aliud (76.), de 
Consecrat. dist. 4. 



I02 APPENDIX 

baptism confers on them. For it seems to offer them nothing, since 
they are already justified by faith and contrition, and their sins are 
already remitted.^To this we can rightly reply that they are cer- 
tainly justified by faith and contrition, that is, purged from the stain 
of sin, and absolved from the debt of eternal punishment, but as yet 
they are held to temporal satisfaction, by which penitents are bound 
in the Church. When however they receive baptism, they are both 
cleansed from their sins, if they have committed any in the interim 
after conversion, and are absolved from exterior satisfaction; and 
helping grace and every virtue are increased in them, so that they 
can then truly be called new men. The incentive to sin is also les- 
sened still more in them. Therefore Jerome^ says, that the faith, 
which makes them faithful, is given or nourished in the waters of 
baptism; because it is there given sometimes to one who does not 
have it yet, and again it is given to one who has it that he may have 
it more fully.^ This we must also understand of others. 

VI. What is remitted in the baptism of a just person. 

He who therefore comes to baptism clean is there made cleaner, 
and to the one who already has faith, it is there given more fully. 
That every external satisfaction is there discharged, Ambrose*^ 
shows in his comment on this passage : "For the gifts and calling of 
God are without repentance," * saying : "The grace of God in baptism 
does not require groaning or lamentations, or any work, but forgives 
all freely." This certainly must be understood of external groaning 
or lamentations ; for without the interior groaning and lamentations, 
no adult is renewed; but exterior satisfactions and afflictions, that is, 
the mourning garments of penitents, are thereby remitted. Baptism, 
therefore, bestows much, even on one already justified by faith; 
because he comes to baptism, just as the branch was brought by the 
dove into the ark; before, he was within in the judgment of God, but 
now he is within, in the judgment of the Church also. But since sin 
is forgiven in baptism, and exterior satisfaction is not enjoined, 



^ This passage not found in Jerome. 

2 Matt. 25, 29. 

3 (Among his works.) Comment, in Epist. ad Rom. 11, 29, and C. Sine 
poenitentia (99.), de Consecrat. dist. 4. 

^Rom. II, 29. 



DISTINCTION IV 103 

someone may ask why the punishment of death, to which we are 
condemned for sin, is not taken away. The saints declare this is so, 
''because if men were freed from that punishment by baptism, they 
would think that, and not the eternal kingdom the reward of baptism. 
Therefore the guilt of sin being removed, temporal punishment still 
remains, in order that men may seek that life more eagerly, which 
will be free from all punishments." ^ Therefore death remains, that 
the faithful may have a cause for conflict, and an occasion for con- 
quest, who would not conquer if they did not fight; nor would 
they fight if in baptism they were made immortal. 

VII. Of what thing {res) the baptism, which a just person receives, 
may he the sacrament. 

If someone asks of what thing that baptism may be a sacra- 
ment,2 which is given to one already righteous, we- say that it is a 
sacrament of that which has preceded it, that is, of the remission 
already granted through faith, and of the remission of temporal 
punishment or of sin, if any has been committed in the interim, and 
of the newness of life and of all grace there offered. It is in fact the 
sign of everything of which it is the cause. Nor should you wonder 
that sometimes the thing precedes the sacrament, since it sometimes 
also follows long after, as in the case of those who come insincerely, 
whom baptism begins to benefit when they afterwards do penance; 
in these cases baptism was the sacrament of the sanctification they 
have by doing penance. — But if they never do penance, nor aban- 
don their deceit, of what thing (res) is the baptism they receive 
the sacrament? We can say: of the thing which would have taken 
place, if their wickedness had not prevented it. 

We are often asked, if grace is given to infants in baptism, 
by which, when they reach the time of exercising free will, they can 
will and do good works.^ As for adults indeed who worthily receive 
the sacrament we cannot doubt that they receive operative and 
cooperative grace, which withdraws from them, if they afterwards, 
of their own free will, sin mortally, and because of their sin destroy 
the grace bestowed. Wherefore they are said to offend the holy 



^ Isidore, I. Sent. c. 22. n. 3; see also Augustine, XIII. de Civ. Dei, c. 4. 

2 Sacrament in the sense of sign. 

3 See Rom. 9, 16; II. Cor. 6, i ; below, Hebrews 10, 29. 



I04 APPENDIX 

Spirit and make him flee from them. — But as for infants, who do not 
yet employ reason, the question is whether in baptism they receive 
^race, by which when they come to later years they can will and do 
good works. It seems that they do not receive it, because that grace 
is charity and faith which prepares and supports the will. But who 
has said that they have received faith and charity? If they do not 
receive grace, by which they can do good works when they are 
grown; then the grace given them at this age in baptism does not 
suffice, nor by it now can they be good, unless another grace is added ; 
if it is not added, it is not their fault, because they have been justified 
from sin. — Some think operative and cooperative grace is given to 
all infants in baptism as a gift, not for use, that when they come to 
greater age, they may receive the use of the gift, unless by free will 
they destroy the use of the gift by sin; so it is by their fault, not 
from the failure of grace, that they become evil ; who although they 
are able to have good habits by the gift of God, have refused them 
through free will, and have chosen evil habits.* 



*For the solution, which the Lombard does not give, see Bonaventura, 
Comment, p. II. a. 2, q. i. 2. 



Distinction V 

I, That baptism is equally good when administered by a good, or a 
bad man. 

Next we must understand that the sacrament of baptism may be 
given by good and by bad ministers just as it is received by good and 
bad men. Nor is the baptism better which is given by a better man, 
nor less good, which is given by a less good man ; nor evil, which is 
given by an evil man; nor is a greater gift given in baptism by 
a good man, nor a less given in baptism by an evil man, but equally, 
because the gift is not of man, but of God. All of this is taught 
by the following testimonies. Augustine^ says : "For baptism derives 
its character from him through whose power it is given, not from 
him through whose ministry it is given." The same: "Certainly 
it can happen, that some may have true baptism and not have the 
true faith." Also: "If among good ministers, one is better than 
another, but the baptism which is given by the better one, is 
not better; so the baptism is in no wise bad, which is given by a 
wicked man, because the same baptism is given. And therefore 
by disparate ministers the gift of God is equal, because it is not 
theirs but his." The same^ : "When a wicked man baptizes, the 
baptism which is given is the same, nor is it unequal on account of 
unequal ministers but like and equal, because of this word : 'He it is 
that baptizeth.' " The same^ : "I say and we all say, that they 
through whom baptism is administered ought to be just; the min- 
isters of such a judge ought to be just. Let these ministers be just, 
if they will; if, however, they who sit in the chair of Moses do not 
wish to be just, my master, that is Christ, makes me safe, for of him 
the holy Spirit says : 'He it is that baptizeth.' " The same^ : "Whom 
Judas has baptized, Christ has baptized. If therefore a drunkard, a 



^ In loan. Evang. tr. 5. n. 6, and C. Baptismus talis (26.), de Consecrat. 
dist. 4. 

* In loan. Evang. tr. 6. n. 8, and C. Cum haptizat malus (27.), de Consecrat. 
dist. 4. (See John i, 33.) 

3 Ibid. tr. 5. n. 15, and C. Baptismus talis, (26.), ibid. §3. 

* Ibid. n. 18, and C. Dedit Baptismum (46.), c. i. q. i. §1. 

105 



io6 APPENDIX 

murderer, an adulterer has baptized anyone, if it was Christ's bap- 
tism, Christ has baptized. I do not fear the adulterer, nor the 
murderer, because I give heed to the dove, who says to me: 'He it 
is that baptizeth.' " The same^ : "A murderer gave the baptism of 
Christ; which sacrament is so holy that it is not defiled when a 
murderer is ministering." The same^: **If in any heresy or schism 
anyone in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy 
Spirit has received the sacrament of baptism, he has received the 
entire sacrament ; but he will not have salvation, which is the virtue 
of the sacrament, if he receives the sacrament itself outside the 
catholic Church. He ought therefore to return to the Church, not 
that he may again receive the sacrament of baptism, which no one 
ought in any case to repeat, but that in the catholic fellowship, he 
may receive life. For baptism cannot profit outside the Church. 
There only baptism can benefit him where mercy can benefit him, 
that is, in the Church." So Isidore^ : **The Roman pontiff does not 
judge that it is a man who baptizes, but the spirit of God, who sup- 
plies the grace of baptism, even though he who baptizes may be a 
pagan." Whence you can easily see that true baptism is given to 
good and to evil, both by good and by evil, and yet it is equally holy 
and its gift equal for the good, whether they be baptized by good 
men, or by evil : 

II. Of the power and the ministry of baptism. 

Because they have only the ministry, not the power of baptism ; 
for the power Christ retains for himself. Which John knew when he 
saw the dove descending upon Christ. Wherefore Augustine:* 
"What did John the Baptist know? The Lord. What did he not 
know? that the power of the Lord's baptism would not be given by 
the Lord to any man, but the ministry clearly was to be given : the 



* Ibid. n. 19. and in the same canon §2. 

* Fulgent, de Fide ad Petrum, c. 3. n. 43. 

3 Can. Romanus pontifex (23.), de Consecrat. dist. 4. Passage cannot be 
found in Isidore, but in Egbert of York, I. Poenitent. p. I. c. 7, and Alger, III. de 
Sacramento c. 6. — Note below that the last proposition of the chapter is inter- 
rupted by the division of chapters. 

* In loan. Evang. tr. 5, n. 11, and C. Baptismus talis (26.), de Consecrat 
dist. 4. §1. (See John i, 33.) 



DISTINCTION V 107 

power was to be given by the Lord to no one, but the ministry to 
good and evil. Let the dove not dread the ministry of the wicked, 
let him consider the power of the Lord. What does a wicked min- 
ister do for you, where the Lord is good ?" " 'Neither he that plant- 
eth is any thing, nor he that watereth; but God that giveth the 
increase.' If the minister is proud, he is reckoned with the devil ; but 
he does not defile the gift of Christ, because that which flows through 
him, is pure. Through a stony channel the water flows into gardens ; 
in the stony channel nothing is produced but the garden bears 
very many fruits." ^ — Not only good men therefore, but also wicked, 
have the ministry of baptizing, but neither has the power of 
baptism. "For^ Christ gave the ministry to his servants, but 
the power he himself retained, which if he had wished he could 
have given to his servants, that the servant might give his own 
baptism as if by his own power. And he could have appointed 
his power to some servant or some servants, so that there would be 
as much power in the baptism of a servant as there is in the baptism 
of the Lord; but he would not, lest a servant might put hope in a 
servant. A servant baptizes as a minister, the Lord baptizes as one 
with power ; if he should give the power to servants, so that it would 
be theirs as it was the Lord's, there would be as many baptisms as 
servants, so that, just as the baptism of John was spoken of, so would 
the baptism of Peter or of Paul be spoken of. That this might not 
occur, the Lord retained for himself the power of baptism, but he 
gave the ministry to his servants. If therefore a servant says that 
he baptizes ; he says rightly, but he baptizes only as a minister, and 
therefore it makes no difference whether a good or an evil man 
baptizes." "Therefore also no one says 'my baptism,' although he 
says 'my Gospel,' 'my prudence,' yet these things are from God. In 
these there is a difference : for one man works better than another in 
evangelizing, and one is more prudent than another; but it cannot 
be said that one is more or less baptized than another, or that one is 
baptized by an inferior or by a greater." ^ 



* Augustine, ibid. n. 15, and C. Si iustus (30.), c. i. q. i ; quotes I. Cor. 3, 7. 
' Ibid. n. 7. (much omitted by the Lombard.) 

8 August., V. de Baptismo contra Donatistas, c. 14. n. 16, and C. Cum 
tantum (47.), de Consecrat. dist. 4. §1. 



io8 APPENDIX 

III. What zvas the pozver of baptism, which Christ could have given 
to his servants and did not give? 

Here we are asked, what was that power of baptism, which 
Christ retained for himself and which he could have given his serv- 
ants. — This is, as very many assert, the power of remitting sins in 
baptism. — But the power of remitting sins which is in God, is God. 
Therefore some say that he could not have given this power to any 
of his servants, because he could have given to no one to be what he 
himself is, or to have the essence which he himself has, for to him 
to be is to have power. They say then : if he could give this power 
to anyone, he could empower him to create creatures, because the 
latter is no greater power than the former.^ — To which we can say 
that he could give them the power of remitting sins. Yet not that 
same power by which he is powerful, but created power, by which 
the servant could remit sins; not however as the author of remis- 
sion, but as the minister and not without God as the author; just 
as in the ministry the servant has power to sanctify externally, so 
in the ministry he would have power to cleanse inwardly; and just 
as he did this cleansing with God the author who works the external 
cleansing with him, so he would cleanse inwardly with God as the 
author, who would use his word as a form of ministry. So also God 
could create anything through anyone, not through the man as 
author, but as minister, with whom and in whom he would work; 
just as in our good works, he works and we : neither he alone, nor 
we alone, but he with us and in us, and yet we are his ministers in 
accomplishing these good works, not authors. Thus he could have 
given the servant the power of remitting sins in baptism, that is, 
that in the inward cleansing the servant should work with the Lord ; 
not the servant without the Lord, nor the Lord without the servant, 
but the Lord with the servant and in the servant, just as in the 
outward ministry the Lord works with the servant and in the 
servant. Wherefore both the Lord and the servant are said to 
sanctify; but the Lord by invisible grace, the servant by the visible 
sacrament. So Augustine in his commentary on Leviticus^: "The 
Lord says : T the Lord, who sanctify' ^ ; and concerning Moses also 



^ Cf. Glossa apud Lyranum loan. 14, 12. 
2 Lib. III. Quaestion. in Pentateuch, q. 84. 
'Levit. 21, 15. 



DISTINCTION V 109 

it is said : 'And thou shalt sanctify him.' ^ But Moses sanctifies with 
visible sacraments through the ministry, but the Lord with invisible 
grace through the Spirit, wherein is the whole fruit of the visible 
sacraments. Without this sanctification visible sacraments profit 
nothing" — If anyone can explain this better, I am not envious. ^ 



* Exod. 29, 24. 

2 This opinion is not commonly accepted. See Bonaventura, Comment.. 
a. 3. 



Distinction VI 



PART 1 



I. Who a/re permitted to baptize. 

Let us now further consider who are permitted to baptize. On 
this point Isidore says^ : "It is established that baptism is admin- 
istered only by priests, and it is not lawful even for deacons to per- 
form the ministry of it without a bishop or priest, unless, when they 
are absent at a distance, extreme necessity of weakness requires it, 
and then it is also allowable for the faithful laity to baptize." From 
the fourth Council of Carthage r^ "Let no woman, no matter how 
holy, presume to baptize, unless necessity compels her." 

II. // those baptized by heretics must be rebaptized. 

As for those who were baptized by heretics, we are often asked 
whether they should be rebaptized. — To this we say briefly that 
whoever it is who baptizes, if he follows the form given by Christ, 
-he gives true baptism; therefore he who receives it ought not be 
rebaptized. Wherefore Bede^ : "If anyone, whether he be heretic or 
^schismatic or criminal baptizes in the confession of the holy Trinity, 
iit is not well that he who was baptized, should be rebaptized by good 
Catholics, lest the confession and invocation of the Trinity seem 
to be made of no effect." Also Augustine* : "Although the baptism 
of heretics, that is of those who baptize in the name of the Father 
and of the Son and of the holy Spirit, be the same as that of the 
catholic Church, yet those persons who were baptized outside the 



^ Lib. 11. de Ecclesiast. Officiis, c. 25. n. 9; C. Constat, haptisma (19.), de 
Consecrat. dist. 4. 

2 Num. 99 and 100; C. Mulier (20.), ibid. 

3 Homil. aestiv. de Temp, in festo Invent. S. Crucis; C. Sive haereticus (51.), 
ibid. 

^ Dialogus quaestion. 65. q. 59. (among his works); C. Quamvis unum (29.), 
ibid. See II. Tim. 3, 5. 

no 



DISTINCTION VI iii 

church do not receive baptism unto salvation, but unto destruction, 
having the form of the sacrament, but denying its virtue; and there- 
fore the Church does not rebaptize them, because they were baptized 
in the name of the Trinity, and that is the form of the sacrament." 
Also^ : "To rebaptize a heretic who has received these signs of sanc- 
tification is certainly a sin; to rebaptize a Catholic, the most mon- 
strous wrong." — From these authorities we can clearly gather, that 
even those who have been baptized by heretics, when the form given 
by Christ has been preserved, are not to be rebaptized, but only 
reconciled by the laying on of hands, that they may receive the 
holy Spirit, and in token of detestation of the heretics. 

There are however some of the doctors,^ as Cyprian and certain 
others, who seem to say that baptism cannot be administered by 
heretics, and that those who are said to have been baptized by them 
are to be rebaptized when they come into the Church. — But this is 
true of those heretics who presume to baptize without the form of 
the Church. Cyprian,^ however, herein seems to have deviated from 
the truth, when he says concerning a heretic: "In what way can he 
sanctify water when he is unclean, and when the holy Spirit is not 
with him ; since the Lord says in the Law* : 'Whatever things an 
unclean person touches, shall be unclean'? Who can give what he 
himself has not?" Augustine intimates that he said this from 
ignorance^ : "As to the glorious martyr Cyprian, who did not wish 
to recognize the baptism conferred among heretics or schismatics, 
since he detested them exceedingly, he attained to the triumph of 
martyrdom by such great merits, that this shadow was dispelled by 
the light of the charity in which he excelled, and if anything needed 
to be purged away, it was removed by the scythe of suffering. Nor 
are we better therefore than Cyprian, because we recognize the truth 
of baptism and the iniquity of heretics, just as we are not better than 
Peter, because we do not compel the Gentiles to judaize." 



1 August., Epist. 23 (alias 203.) adMaximin. n. 2; C Rebaptizare haereticum 
(108.) ibid. 

2 Cf. August., VI. and VII. contra Donatistas, and other doctors. 

3 Epist. ad lubaianum eiusque episc. Acta etc, 
* Num. 19, 22. 

5 De Unico Baptismo contra Petilian. c. 13. n. 22. 



112 APPENDIX 

PART II' 

III. That no one may be baptised in his mother's womb. 

We must also understand, "that although immersion is per- 
formed three times on account of the mystery of the Trinity, yet it 
is counted only one baptism." ^ — We are also not to be ignorant that 
no one can be baptized in his mother's womb, even if the mother 
be baptized. Wherefore Isidore^ : "Those who are in their mothers' 
wombs cannot be baptized, because he who is not yet born according 
to Adam, cannot be born again according to Christ, nor can we speak 
of the re-birth of one, whose birth has not preceded it." Also, 
Augustine^ : "No one can be born again before he is born." 

But if Jeremiah* and John the Baptist be cited against this 
opinion, because they were said to be sanctified from the womb, as 
also some think was true of Jacob; we say that if they there received 
sanctification as inward cleansing, it must be held among the mir- 
acles of divine power, as Augustine says,^ speaking ambiguously 
about this: "If," he says, "the use of reason and will was so far 
advanced in that boy that within the mother's womb he could already 
know and believe a thing that only age makes possible in other chil- 
dren, it must be held among the miracles of divine power, not taken 
as typical of human nature. For when God willed it, even an ass 
spoke."^ Also*^: "Concerning Jeremiah it is said: 'Before thou 
camest out of the womb, I sanctified thee' ; but that sanctification by 
which we are made the temple of God, is only for the reborn.'* 
" 'For unless a man be born again of water and of the holy Spirit, 
he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.' No one is born again, 
unless he is already born."^ "Wherefore this sanctification can be 
received according to predestination." ^ — Here he seems to speak 



1 Jerome, II. Comment, in Epist. ad Eph. (4, 5.); C. Eodem modo (81.), 
ibid. 

2 Lib. I. Sent. c. 22. n. 5; C. Qui in maternis (115.), ibid. 

3 Epist. 187. (alias 57.) ad Dardan. c. 9. n. 31. 

* Jer. 1,5; (concerning John the Baptist) — Luke 1,15. 
5 Epist. cit. c. 7. n. 24. 

* Numbers 22, 28. 

' Augustine, Epist. cit. c. 10. n. 32; see Jer. i, 5. 
8 Epist. cit. c. 10. n. 33 ; see John 3, 5. 
' Epist. cit. c. 12. n. 37. 



DISTINCTION VI 113 

doubtfully, when he also says^ : *Tt is not said that the infant believed 
in the womb, but that he leaped; nor did Elisabeth say : he leaped in 
faith, but, he leaped in my womb. And this sanctification could be 
the sign of greatness recognized by the older person, but not compre- 
hended by the child. — He speaks without assertion of this sanctifi- 
cation, not defining just how the sanctification is to be understood, 
whether it be the sign of something to come, or the truth of the justi- 
fication accomplished by the Spirit. But it is better that we say that 
these two (Jeremiah and John) were justified in the womb contrary 
to the common law, and aided by grace all sins were forgiven them ; 
this is also taught by many testimonies of the saints. 

IV. Whether it he baptism, when the words are incorrectly pro- 
nounced. 

Moreover we are often asked if there be baptism, when the 
words are incorrectly pronounced. — On this point Zacharias^ writes 
to Boniface : "Your messengers have reported to me that there has 
been a priest in the same province, who was completely ignorant of 
the Latin language, and when he baptized, not knowing how to 
speak Latin, he would say brokenly : 'Baptizo te in nomine Patria et 
Filia et Spiritu sancta' ; and on this account you have considered 
rebaptizing. But if he who baptized, did not introduce error or 
heresy, but by mere ignorance of Roman speech, has spoken the 
language brokenly in baptizing ; we cannot agree that those whom he 
baptized should be baptized again." 

Besides, we ought to know that "for those persons, about whose 
baptism there is no knowledge among the members of their family or 
among their neighbors, as to who baptized them, something must be 
done that they may be re-born lest they perish ; in which case reason 
allows that what cannot be proved to have been done, may seem to 
be repeated. It seems that what is not known to have been pre- 
viously conferred, must be conferred on them, because there is na 
heedlessness of presumption where there is the diligence of piety. "•'* 



^ Epist. cit. c. 7. n. 23. 

2 Apud. Isidor., C. Retulerunt (86.), ibid. 

3 S. Leo, Epist. 167. (alias 2.) ad Rustic. Narbonens., inquisitio 16. 17; C. 
Si nulla (113.), ibid. 



114 APPENDIX 

V. Concerning him who is immersed for sport. 

We are often asked also about him who, like an actor, is 
immersed in jest but in commemoration of the Trinity, whether he 
be baptized. — This also Augustine^ does not make plain, when he 
says: "If the whole thing was done in jest and mimicry and jocu- 
larity, I think the divine judgment through the miracle of some 
revelation should be implored in prayer, as to whether the baptism, 
which was thus given, ought to be approved." It seems however to 
wise men that it was not baptism ; as when persons are immersed in 
a bath or in a river in the name of the Trinity, the act is still not a 
baptism, because it was not done with the intention of baptizing. For 
in this and in other sacraments just as the form must be observed, so 
also there must be the intention of celebrating it. "Moreover do not 
let this disturb you, that some do not bring their children to baptism 
in the faith, that they may be regenerated by the Spirit to eternal 
life ; but think that through this remedy they receive temporal health ; 
for not on that account do the children fail to be regenerated, 
because they were not offered by their parents with this intention." 2 

We must also recognize that in baptizing the elect two seasons^ 
are to be adhered to, namely, Easter and Pentecost, so that the 
sacrament of baptism may be celebrated on Easter Saturday or that 
of Pentecost. But any who are in the emergency of death or danger 
ought to be baptized at any season. 

VI. Of the replies of the godparents. 

Furthermore all who come to baptism ought to profess their 
faith and set forth for what purpose they come to the Church. 
Wherefore indeed the one to be baptized is asked: What do you 
come to the Church to seek? And he, if he is come to maturity, 
responds for himself : faith, that is, the sacrament of faith and teach- 
ing. So then being asked one thing at a time, he answers that he 
believes in the Father, and in the Son, and in the holy Spirit. But 
if he is an infant, not able to believe or to speak, another answers 

^Lib. VII. de Baptismo contra Donatistas, c. 53. n. 102; C. Solet etiam 
quaeri (31.), ibid. For what follows, cf. Hugh, II. de Sacram. p. VI. c. 13. 

2 August., Epist. 98. (alias 23.) ad ^Bonifac. n. 5; C. Non illud te moveat 
(33.), ibid. 

3 Cf. Leo, Epist. 16. ad universos Episc. per Siciliam constitutos c. 5; and 
C. Duo tempora (12.), ibid. 



DISTINCTION VI 115 

for him. Wherefore Isidore^ : "Infants who cannot yet speak or 
believe are baptized on the confession of another, just as also another 
confesses for the sick, the dumb, the deaf, while they are being bap- 
tized." So also we must do for penitents. "But if another responds 
for one who can respond, it is not efficacious in the same way, as has 
been said : 'He is of age, let him speak for himself.' " ^ 

But if we are asked in what sense it is said for the child: I 
believe, or I seek faith; we say that the sacrament of faith, is to 
be understood, that he is said to seek when he is brought to the 
church, and he is said to have faith when he is baptized ; so that the 
sense may be this: I seek faith, that is, I am ready to receive the 
sacrament of faith; I believe, that is, I receive the sacrament of 
faith; or: This infant is ready to receive the sacrament of 
faith. Wherefore Augustine^ : "To believe is nothing else than to 
have faith; and therefore, when we answer that the infant believes, 
who has not yet the effect of faith, we answer that he has 
through the sacrament of faith, and turns to God through the sacra- 
ment of conversion." 

But we are still asked in what sense we answer for the child: 
I believe in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ, and in the holy 
Spirit. Is it there a question of the sacrament of faith or of the 
faith of the mind? If of the sacrament why are the persons of the 
Trinity distinguished by name? But if of the emotion of faith, 
how is it true, when the child is without it ? Or do we promise that 
the infant will believe this when he is grown, just as we also vow 
that he will renounce the pomps of the devil, and if he has not 
observed the vow when he comes to maturity, will he or the sponsor 
be held to account ? — Rightly indeed we can say, that we there prom- 
ise for the infant, that, if he comes to maturer years, he will both 
renounce the pomps of the devil and hold a sound faith, the sacra- 
ment of which he then receives. The infant will be held moreover 
by the vow made for him, not the sponsor; provided that as much 
as in him lies the sponsor has taken care that the obligation be ful- 
filled, because it is required of the godfather that he have diligent 
solicitude for him for whom he promised. Concerning this Augus- 

^ Lib. II. de Ecclesiast. officiis, c. 25. n. 7; C. Parvuli (74.), ibid. 

2 August., IV. de Baptismo contra Donatistas, c. 24. n. 31; see John 9, 21; 
C. Cum pro parvulis (77.), ibid. 

3 Epist. 98. (alias 23.) ad Bonifac. episc. n. 9; C. Nihil est aliud (76.), ibid. 



ii6 APPENDIX 

tine says^ : "You have undertaken the most certain obligation, when 
you solemnly promised to renounce the pomps of the devil." 

VII. Of catechism and exorcism. 

Moreover these questions and answers concerning faith occur in 
the catechism^ ; to which exorcism is added. For before baptism 
catechism and exorcism are performed, exorcism following after 
catechism, so that the power of the adversary may be expelled from 
him who is now instructed in the faith. Exorcism, a Greek word, is 
translated into Latin, adjuration; catechism is translated instruc- 
tion; to catechize is to instruct, as regards the Creed, and the rudi- 
ments of the faith. To exorcize is to adjure as : "Depart from him, 
thou unclean spirit"; the Creed is the sign or collection: a sign, 
because by it the faithful are distinguished from infidels ; a collec- 
tion, because therein the completeness and entirety of the faith are 
collected. — Catechism and exorcism are for neophytes, and ought to 
be called sacramentals rather than sacraments. Neophyte is trans- 
lated novice or untried; and one newly converted to the faith or 
untried in the discipline of 'religious conversation' is called a neo- 
phyte. — Catechism and exorcism therefore precede baptism, not 
because without them there cannot be true baptism, but in order that 
the one to be baptized may be instructed concerning the faith, and 
may know to whom he is thenceforth become a debtor, and that the 
power of the devil may be diminished in him. Wherefore Ra- 
banus^ : "For an adult the office of catechizing ought to come before 
baptism; so that a catechumen may receive the rudiments of faith, 
and may know to whom he is thenceforth become a debtor." Also 
Augustine^: "Infants are blown upon and exorcised, so that the 
power of the devil may be banished from them," "lest^ now he try 
to destroy them, that they attain not to baptism." "Therefore^ it 
is not a creature of God that is blown out and exorcized from infants, 
but the devil, that he may depart from man." 

1 According to the sense, from i. Serm. ad Neophytos (among the works of 
Augustine); according to the words, C. Prima igitur (73.), ibid. 

2 The passage following is from Hugh of St. Victor, II. de Sacram. p. VI. 
c. 8. 9. 10. 

' Lib. I. de Institutione clericorum, c. 25. C. Ante baptismum (54.), ibid. 

* De Symbolo ad catechum. serm. i. c. i. n. 2; C. Sicut nostis (62.), ibid. 
' Raban., ibid. c. 27. 

• August., de Symbobo, loc. cit. 



Distinction VII 

I. Of the Sacrament of Confirmation. 

Now we must next discuss the sacrament of confirmation, for 
we are often questioned concerning its virtue. For the form is clear, 
that is, the words which the bishop says, when he signs the baptized 
on the forehead with the sacred chrism. 

II. That it can only he performed by the chief priests. 

This sacrament^ cannot be performed by any except the chief 
priests, for we read that in the time of the apostles it was not per- 
formed by others than the apostles themselves, nor can, nor ought it 
be performed by others than those who hold the place of the apostles. 
For if it be undertaken by others, it is held to be null and void, nor 
will it be counted among the sacraments of the church. But it is 
lawful for presbyters to touch the baptized on the breast but not 
to sign them with the chrism on the forehead. 

III. What the virtue of this sacrament is. 

The virtue moreover of the sacrament is the gift of the holy 
Spirit for strength, who is given in baptism for remission. Where- 
fore Rabanus^ : "By the chief priest through the laying on of hands 
the Paraclete is given to one baptized, that he may be strengthened 
through the holy Spirit, to proclaim to others that which he has 
attained in baptism." Also^ : "All the faithful ought after bap- 
tism to receive the holy Spirit by the laying on of hands by the bishops 
so that they may be found to be complete Christians." 

IV. Whether this sacrament is more worthy than baptism. 

"Know that both are great sacraments, but one must be held in 
greater veneration, as it is administered by those who are greater." * 
— See he calls the sacrament of confirmation the greater ; but perhaps 

1 Passage taken from Sum. Sent. tr. 6. c. i; and C. Manus quoque (4.), de 
Consecrat. dist. 5. 

2 Lib. I. de Institutione clericorum, c. 30. 

3 Can. Omnes fideles (i.) de Consecrat. dist. 5. 
* Can. De his vero (3.), de Consecrat. dist. 5. 

117 



ii8 APPENDIX 

not on account of the greater virtue and utility which it confers, but 
because it is administered by those who are worthier, and is per- 
formed on a worthier part of the body, that is on the forehead ; or 
perhaps because it offers a greater increase of virtue, although 
baptism has more power for remission. Rabanus seems to mean this 
when he says that^ "in the anointing of baptism the holy Spirit 
descends to consecrate his habitation to God. But in this sacrament 
his seven-fold grace, with all fullness of sanctity and virtue comes 
upon man.'^ — This sacrament ought only to be received by persons 
fasting, and be administered by fasting, just as baptism, unless 
necessity compels otherwise.^ 

V. Whether it can he repeated. 

Nor ought it be repeated, as baptism ought not, nor ordination. 
For injury must not be done to any sacrament; and it would be 
thought an injury, were we to repeat what must not be repeated. — 
But whether some can be repeated or none is a question. For that 
baptism and ordination ought not be repeated, Augustine clearly 
says^ : "Each is a sacrament, and is administered with a certain con- 
secration, the one when a person is baptized ; but the other when he 
is ordained. Therefore in the Catholic Church it is not permitted 
to repeat either," because injury must not be done to either. And 
without doubt we must hold that this is true also of confirmation; 
but whether others can or ought to be repeated, we shall discuss later. 

Note. Gregory^ writes to Bishop Januarius thus : "It has come 
to our ears, that some have been offended, because we restrained 
presbyters from touching with the chrism those who had been bap- 
tized; and we certainly did this according to the old use of our 
church. But if some are much distressed by this ; we concede that 
where bishops are absent, presbyters may touch the baptized with 
chrism even on the forehead." "But that concession seems to me 
to have been made at one particular time for checking a scandal." 



^ Loc. cit., and C. Novissime (5.), ibid. 

2 Cf. C. Ut ieiuni (6.) and Ut episcopi (7.), ibid.; and Hugh, II. de Sacram. 
p. VII. c. 5. 

3 Lib. II. contra Epist. Parmeniani, c. 13. n. 28, and C. Quod quidam (97.), 
c. I. q. I. §1. 

* Lib. IV. Regist. indict. 12. epist. 26, and C. Pervenit (i.), dist. 95. The 
following passage gives the words of Gratian on C. Preshyteros (2.), ibid. 



Distinction VIII 

PART I 

I. Of the sacrament of the altar. 

"After the sacrament of baptism and of confirmation, follows 
the sacrament of the Eucharist. Through baptism we are cleansed, 
through the Eucharist, we are perfected in what is good." ^ Baptism 
extinguishes the fire of sins, the Eucharist restores us spiritually. 
Wherefore it is well called the Eucharist, that is, good grace, because 
in this sacrament not only is there increase of virtue and grace, but 
he who is the fount and source of all grace is received entire. 

II. That in the Old Testament there was a type of this sacrament, 

just as of baptism. 

"There was a previous type of it, when God rained manna on 
the Fathers in the wilderness, and fed them with heavenly food; 
wherefore: 'Man has eaten the bread of angels.' But those who 
ate that bread then died. But this is the living bread, which 'came 
down from heaven,' and gave life to the world."^ That manna was 
from heaven, this above heaven ; that when reserved to another day 
was full of worms; this is free from all corruption; whoever has 
tasted it religiously shall not see corruption. That was given to 
the ancients after the crossing of the Red Sea, where the Hebrews 
were freed by the drowning of the Egyptians^; so this heavenly 
manna ought only be given to those re-born. That bread for the 
body led the ancient people through the desert to the land of promise; 
this heavenly food sustains the faithful going through the desert of 
this world to heaven. Wherefore it is rightly called the Viaticum,' 
because it restores us on the way, and leads us unto the fatherland. 
Therefore just as in the Red Sea we find baptism typified, so in the 



* Sum. Sent. tr. 6. c. 2. 

2 Ambrose, de Mysteriis, c. 8. n. 47; n. 48 for the following passage; both 
in C. Revera (69.) de Consecrat. dist. 2. See Exod. 16, 15; Ps. 77, 25; John 6, 41. 

* Exod. 16, 14; then 14, 25 flf. 

119 



I20 APPENDIX 

tnanna is the Lord's body signified. These two sacraments were 
indicated when the blood and water flowed from the side of Christ^ ; 
because Christ came to redeem us from the devil and sin by the blood 
of redemption, and the water of cleansing, just as he freed the Israel- 
ites from the destroyer by the blood of the paschal lamb,^ and from 
the Egyptians by the water of the sea. — Melchisedech also prefigured 
the rite of this sacrament, when he offered bread and wine to Abra- 
ham.^ Wherefore, as Ambrose* says, it is clear, "that the sacra- 
ments of the Christians came before those of the Jews." 

III. Of the institution of this sacrament. 

Here four other things present themselves for consideration, 
that is, the institution, the form, the sacrament, and the thing (res). 
The Lord instituted the sacrament, when after the type of the lamb 
he offered his body and blood to the disciples at supper. Where- 
fore Eusebius Emisenus^ : "Because he was about to withdraw from 
their eyes the body he had assumed, and bear it to the heavens, it 
was necessary that on the day of the Feast he should consecrate the 
sacrament of the body and blood for us, so that what was once 
offered as a ransom, might be perpetually worshipped through a 
mystery." 

PART II 

IV. Of the form. 

But the form is that which he himself taught when he said: 
**This is my body" ; and afterward : "This is my blood." For when 
these words are uttered, a change of the blood and wine into the 
substance of the body and blood of Christ takes place. All other 
words are said to the praise of God. Wherefore Ambrose^ : "This 
sacrament is accomplished by the words of Christ, because the words 
of Christ change the creature ; and thus the bread becomes the body 



1 John 19, 34. 

2 Exod. 12, 13. 

3 Gen. 14, 18. 

* Loc. cit. c. 8. n. 44; and IV. de Sacram. c. 3. n. 10. 

^ Homil, de Corp. et sang. Christi, n. i. among the works of Jerome (Episl. 
38.); also among the works of Isidore, Serm. 4. de corp. etc. n. 2. and C. Quia 
corpus (35.), de Consecrat. dist. 2. 

* Lib. IV. de Sacram. c. 4. n. 14 ff.; following passage from the same place; 
cf. C. Panis est (55.), ibid. 



DISTINCTION VIII 121 

of Christ, and the wine with water poured into the chalice becomes 
the blood by the consecration of the heavenly word. By what words 
is the consecration made? Hear what the words are: 'Take ye and 
eat ye all of this ; this is my body,' and again : Take ye and drink 
ye all of this, this is my blood.' All the rest that is uttered renders 
praise to God, offers prayer for the people and for the kings." Also, 
Augustine^ : **We must believe that in these words of Christ the 
sacraments are accomplished ; all the rest are merely praises, or the 
earnest supplications and petitions of the faithful." — See now what 
is the institution and form of this sacrament. 

V. Why Christ gave this sacrament to his disciples after other food. 

Here it is worthy of consideration why he gave this sacrament 
to the disciples after supper. The Lord Jesus being about to depart 
to the invisible majesty of his Father's glory, and having celebrated 
the symbolical passover with the disciples, wished to commend to 
them some memorial, and gave them his body and blood under the 
figure of bread and wine, in order to show that the sacraments of the 
old law, among which the sacrifice of the paschal lamb was chief, 
were terminated at his death, and the sacraments of the new law 
substituted, and among these the mystery of the Eucharist is pre- 
eminent. Therefore he ordained the, Eucharist after the other sacra- 
ments that this sacrament might be more deeply impressed on the 
memory of the disciples, and thenceforth be repeated frequently by 
the Church. But he did not on that account appoint it for discipline 
in the future, that it should be received after other food, but rather 
it ought to be received fasting, as the Apostle teaches,^ so that it may 
be marked by exceptional reverence, that is, set apart from other 
food ; and this the Lord left to the Apostles to arrange. Wherefore 
Augustine^ : "It appears, that when the disciples first received the 
Eucharist, they did not receive it fasting. But we should not there- 
fore scorn the universal Church, because its members always re- 
<:eived the Eucharist fasting. For it pleased the holy Spirit, that 



^ Found briefly in Paschasius Radbertus, de Corp. et sang. Domini, c. 15. 
n. I, and C. Utrum sub figure (72.), ibid. §2. 3. For the following cf. Glossa ad 
I. Cor. II, 23. 24. in Lyranus. 
. 2 1. Cor. II, 22 and 34. 

3 Epist. 54 (alias 118.) ad lanuar. c. 6. n. 7. 8, and C. Liguido (54.), ibid. 



122 APPENDIX 

in honor of so great a sacrament, the body of the Lord should enter 
into the mouth of a Christian before other food ; therefore this cus- 
tom is observed everywhere. For not because the Lord gave the 
Eucharist after other food, ought we to receive it after breakfast 
or dinner, as did those whom the Apostle reproved. For the Saviour 
that he might the more strongly commend the loftiness of this mys- 
tery, wished to impress it last on the hearts and memory of his dis- 
ciples, from whom he was about to go to his passion. But in what 
order it was thereafter to be received he left to be taught by the 
apostles, through whom he would organize his churches." 

VI. Of the sacrament and the thing (res). 

Now let us see what is the sacrament and what the thing (res). 
"The sacrament is the visible form of invisible grace" ^ ; the form 
therefore of the bread and wine which appears here is the sacrament^ 
that is, "the sign of a sacred thing, because it calls something to 
mind beyond the appearance which it presents to the senses." There- 
fore the appearances "keep the names of the things which they were 
before, namely, bread and wine." 

VII. That the thing (res) of this sacrament is two-fold, 

"Moreover the thing (res) of this sacrament is two- fold: one, 
what is contained and signified, the other what is signified but not 
contained. The thing contained and signified is the flesh of Christ 
which he received from the Virgin, and the blood which he shed for 
us. The thing signified and not contained is the unity of the Church 
in those who are predestined, called, justified and glorified." ^ This 
is the two-fold flesh and blood of Christ. Wherefore Jerome: "In 
two ways," he says, "are the flesh of Christ and his blood under- 
stood : either the flesh which was crucified and buried, and the blood 
which was shed by the lance of the soldier; or that spiritual and 
divine body of which he himself says^ : *My flesh is food indeed, and 
my blood is drink indeed'; and: 'Unless ye eat my flesh and drink 

* August., X. de Civ. Dei c. 5, and Epist. 105 (alias 166.) ad Donatistas, 
c. 3. n. 12; cf. C. Sacrificium (32. §1.), ibid. — Following passage is II. de Doctr. 
Christiana, c. i. n. i, and C. Signum (33.), ibid. Third is in C. Specie {34.), ibid. 

* Glossa ad I. Cor. 11, 23, in Lyranus, where are also the words of Jerome, 
Comment, in Eph. i, 7; (cf. C. Dupliciter (49.), ibid.) and the third passage. 

« John 6, 56. 



DISTINCTION VIII 123 

my blood, ye have not life in you.' " ^ Therefore three things are to 
be distinguished here: the first which is the sacrament only; the 
second which is the sacrament and the thing (res) ; and the third 
which is the thing and not the sacrament, The sacrament and not 
the thing is the visible form of bread and wine ; the sacrament and 
the thing is the very flesh and blood of Christ ; the thing and not the 
sacrament, is his mystical flesh. — Furthermore that visible form is 
the sacrament of something two-fold ; because it signifies two things 
and bears the express likeness of two things. For just as bread more 
than other foods restores and sustains the body and wine gladdens 
and inebriates man, so the flesh of Christ spiritually restores and 
sustains the inward man more than other graces; wherefore: 'My 
chalice which inebriateth me, how goodly is it !' ^ The visible form 
bears also a resemblance to a mystical thing, which is the unity of 
the faithful,^ because just as one loaf is made from many grains, 
and wine from many graj>es flows together, so ecclesiastical unity is 
composed of the many persons of the faithful." Wherefore the 
Apostle* : "We being many are one bread and one body." Wherefore 
Augustine^ : "The Church is called one bread and one body, because 
just as one loaf is composed of many grains, and one body of many 
members, so the Church of many faithful is bound together by unit- 
ing charity." "This mystery of our peace and unity Christ conse- 
crated at his table. He who receives this mystery of unity and does 
not keep the bond of peace, receives this mystery not for himself, 
but against himself." "And of this unity also Christ's own body 
received from the Virgin is the sacrament; because as the body of 
Christ was composed of many very pure and immaculate members, 
so the society of the Church is composed of many persons freed 
from the stain of sin. As a type of this unity, the ark® of the Lord 
was made of setim-wood, which does not decay, but is like white 
thorn." 



1 John 6, 54. 

* Psalm 22, 5. 

* Cf. August., in loan. Evang. tr. 26. n. 15 and 17. 

* I. Cor. 10, 17. Cf. ibid. Lyranus. 

* Tract, cit. in loan. ; also in Lyranus, loc. cit. Following passage is C. 
Quia passus (36.), ibid. §1. — ^Third is in Lyranus, I. Cor. il, 24. 

* Exod. 25, 10. 



Distinction IX 

I. Of the two ways of eating. 

And just as there are two things in this sacrament, so also "there 
are two ways of eating : one sacramental, in which the good and evil 
^eat ; the other spiritual, in which only the good eat." ^ Wherefore 
Augustine : "What is it to eat Christ ? It is not only to receive his 
body in the sacrament — for many receive it unworthily — but to abide 
in him and to have him abiding in oneself." "For he eats spiritually, 
who abides in the unity of Christ and of the Church, which the 
sacrament signifies." For he who is at variance with Christ, neither 
eats the flesh of Christ, nor drinks his blood, but receives the sacra- 
ment of it daily to his own judgment." Augustine^ distinguishing 
spiritual eating from the sacramental, says: "Why do you prepare 
your stomach and teeth ? Believe and you have eaten. For to believe 
on him is to eat the bread and wine; whoever believes on him eats 
of him." The same: "How is Christ eaten? In the way that he 
says^ :• Whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, 
and I in him.* If he abides in me, and I in him, then he drinks; 
but whoever does not abide in me, nor I in him, even if he receives 
the sacrament, lays up for himself great torment." The same*: 
*'No one need doubt that he is made a partaker of the body and 
blood of the Lord at the time when he is made a member of Christ ; 
nor is he separated from the fellowship of this bread and cup, 
even though before he eats this bread and drinks this cup, he passes 
from this world established in the unity of the body of Christ, 
because he is not deprived of the benefit of this sacrament, since 



^Glossa on I. Cor. ii, 29, in Lyranus; where are also the two passages of 
Augustine, first, Serm. 71 (alias 11. de Verbis Dom.) c. 11. n. 17; C. Quid est 
Christum (46.), de Consecrat. dist. 2; and the other Lib. Sentent. Prosper! (among 
the works of Augustine) n. 341; C. Qui discordat (65.), ibid. 

2 In loan. Evang. tr. 25. n. 12; C. Ut quid paras (47.), ibid.; following pas- 
sage ibid. tr. 2(5. n. i, and in the same Canon (Augustine: panem vivum for panem 
€t vinum), 

3 John 6, 57. 

* Ibid. n. 18; C. 46. supra cit. Also in Bede, in I. Cor. 11, 27. 

124 



DISTINCTION IX 123 

he evidently possesses that which this sacrament signifies." For 
in this sacrament Christ has commended his body and blood to- 
us, which he has also made us to be. For we are made his very 
body. Againi : ^'Whoever is at variance with Christ does not eat 
his flesh, nor drink his blood, even if he receive the sacrament 
of that great marvel to his own judgment." 

II. Of the error of those who say that the body of Christ is received 
only by the good. 

Some persons, with dull understandings, reading these words 
and others like them, where spiritual eating is discussed, have been 
so involved in the darkness of error that they presume to say that 
the body and blood of Christ are received by the good only and not 
by the bad. — But without doubt we must believe that they are 
received by the good, not only sacramentally, but also spiritually ; but 
by the wicked only sacramentally, namely as a sacrament; that is, 
under the visible form are received the flesh of Christ derived from 
the Virgin and the blood shed for us, but not the mystical flesh and 
blood, which are only for the good. This is proved by the following 
• testimonies. Gregory^ : ''There is indeed the true flesh of Christ and 
the true blood in sinners and those who receive unworthily, but in 
essence, not in saving eflicacy." Also Augustine^ : "Many un- 
worthily receive the body of the Lord ; concerning whom the Apostle 
says* : 'Whoever eateth and drinketh the cup of the Lord unworthily, 
eateth and drinketh judgment to himself/ By which we are taught 
to guard against receiving the good wickedly. For see, evil is done 
when the good is received wickedly; just as, on the contrary, good 
was done by the Apostle, when he received evil well, as when he bore 
the goad of Satan patiently. Therefore even evils benefit the good,, 
just as the angel of Satan did Paul, and sacred things harm the evil : 
they are unto salvation for the good, and unto judgment for the evil. 
Wherefore he who eats and drinks unworthily, eats and drinks 
judgment to himself, not because the thing itself is evil, but because 



^ August., in Sent. Prosperi, see note above, p. i. 

2 Passage not in Gregory, but in Lanfranc, de Corpore et sang. Dom. c. 20. 
2 From tr. 6. in loan. Evang. n. 15 and tr. 62. n. i ; C. Et sancta (66.), ibid, 
* I. Cor. II, 29. 



126 APPENDIX 

the wicked man wickedly receives that which is good." The same^ : 
"Whoever unworthily receives the body of Christ does not bring it 
to pass that because he is evil, what he receives is evil, or because he 
does not receive it unto salvation, he receives nothing. For the body 
and blood of the Lord were none the less in those to whom the 
Apostle says^: 'Whoever eateth unworthily,' etc." — By these and 
many other authorities it is clearly shown that even by the wicked 
the true body and blood of Christ are received ; but sacramentally, 
not spiritually. 

III. On the meaning of certain ambiguous words. 

Regarding these two ways of receiving, the meaning of certain 
ambiguous words must be explained. For Augustine^ says : "A good 
man receives the sacrament and the thing of the sacrament (rem 
sacramenti) ; but a wicked man the sacrament and not the thing 
(rem)." By sacrament he means the actual body of Christ, bom of 
the Virgin ; but by the thing he means the spiritual flesh of Christ. 
The good man therefore receives the flesh of Christ in both senses, 
but the wicked only the sacrament, that is, the body of Christ under 
the sacrament, and not the spiritual thing. — In like manner* : "He 
that eats not, eats, and he that eats, eats not, because he that does 
not eat sacramentally, sometimes eats spiritually," and conversely. 
And those who eat spiritually are said to receive the truth of the flesh 
and blood, "because they have its actual effect, that is, remission of 
sins," ^ for which we apparently pray when we say : "We pray, O 
Lord, that thy sacraments may accomplish in us that which they 
contain ; so that what we now have in appearance, we may receive in 
their inmost truth." By "their inmost truth" he means their effect, 
as if he said : "Grant through these sacraments, as we receive sacra- 



1 Lib. V. de Baptismo contra Donatistas, c. 8. n. 9; C. Sicut ludas (68.), 
ibid. 

2 1. Cor. II, 29. 

3 Gathered from the passages cited. Literally in Glossa ad I. Cor. 11, 24 in 
Lyranus. 

4 In Glossa cit. 

5 Lanfranc, as above, and C. Species et similitudo (34.), ibid. The following 
prayer is in Gregory, Lib. Sacrament, n. 487; cf. Guitmund, II. de Corporis et 
sang. Dom. veritate. 



DISTINCTION IX 127 

mentally the flesh of Christ, so may we receive it spiritually." Or the 
priest prays that Christ who now is truly received under the form 
of bread and wine, may some time be received in clear vision, just 
as he is in the essence of his divinity. — It is therefore certain that 
the body of Christ is received by the good and by the wicked; but 
by the good unto salvation, by the wicked unto destruction. 



Distinction X 

PART I 

I. Of the heresy of others who say that the body of Christ is not 
on the altar save in sign. 

There are also others who exceed the madness of the above 
described, who, measuring the virtue of God by the measure of 
natural things, deny the truth more audaciously and dangerously, 
asserting that on the altar there is neither the body of Christ nor the 
blood, nor is the substance of bread or of wine converted into the 
substance of flesh and blood but that Christ said^ : "This is my body," 
just as the Apostle said^ : "And the rock was Christ." For they say 
that the body of Christ is there only in the sacrament, that is, in sym- 
bol, and merely in symbol is it eaten by us. These find the occasion 
of their error in the words of the Truth, from which^ the first heresy 
arose among the disciples of Christ. For when he said: "Except a 
man eat my flesh, and drink my blood, he shall not have eternal life" ; 
they not understanding said: "This saying is hard, who can under- 
stand it? and they went back." When they had departed, he taught 
the twelve who remained: "It is the Spirit," he said, "who giveth 
life ; the flesh profiteth nothing. The words which I have spoken to 
you, are spirit and life." Have you understood them spiritually? 
They are spirit and life. Have you understood them carnally? 
Even so they are spirit and life, but they are not so for you. Under- 
stand spiritually that which I have said. It is not this body which 
you see that you shall eat, nor drink this blood which they who 
crucify me shall shed. I have commended a certain sacrament to 
you, which if it be spiritually understood, will give you life ; but the 
flesh profiteth nothing." — There are also other passages which add 



* Matt. 26, 26. 

2 1. Cor. 10, 4. 

8 What follows is taken from C. Prima quidem (44.), de Consecrat. dist. 2; 
gathered from Augustine, Enarrat. in Ps. 54. n. 23, and in Ps. 98. n. 9; also ver- 
botenus in Alger, I. de Sacram. corp. et sang. Dom. c. 11. See John 6, 54. 61. 
67. 64. 

128 



DISTINCTION X 129 

fuel to the madness of these people. For Augustine says^ : ''Until 
this age shall be ended, the Lord is on high; but nevertheless there is 
here also with us the Truth, the Lord. For the body in which he 
rose again must be in one place ; but his truth is diffused every- 
where." Also^ : One person is God and man, inasmuch as Christ is 
God, he is everywhere, inasmuch as he is man he is in heaven.'* 
Christ also says : "The poor ye have always with you, but me ye have 
not always." The aforesaid heretics use these and other sayings to 
maintain their error. — All these passages are to be interpreted in the 
same manner. For these words do not deny that the true body of 
Christ is received by the faithful or that it is on the altar, but by 
these words the Truth instructed the Apostles and through them 
us, that he was giving us his body, not divided into parts, as those 
disciples thought, who went back, but entire; and not visibly, in 
human form, but invisibly under the form of bread and wine, did he 
give us his body and blood. Augustine^ confirms this meaning when 
he says : 'Tt is his body itself, and not his body which was seen, that 
is eaten; his body indeed, invisibly; not his body visibly." Also^: 
"And if it is necessary that it should be celebrated visibly, it is 
necessary that it be understood invisibly." So also the body of Christ 
must be understood to be in one place, that is, visibly in human form ; 
but his Truth, that is, his Divinity, is everywhere; his truth also, 
that is, his true body is on every altar, wherever it is celebrated. Sa 
also is this to be understood : "The poor ye have always with you, 
but me ye have not always," that is, with reference to his corporal 
presence, in which he was conversing with them. Similarly, inas- 
much as he is man, he is in heaven, that is, visibly ; but he is on the 
altar invisibly, because he does not appear in human form, but is 
hidden under the form of bread and wine. Wherefore also his flesh, 
which is truly on the altar, is said to be invisible ; but because it does 
not appear in its own form, it is said to be invisible. For Augustine 
says^ : "This is what we say, what we strive in every way to prove : 



^ In loan. Evang. tr. 30. n. i; cf. also tr. 50. n. 12. f. and canon cited §1. 

2 August., Epist. 187. (alias 57.) ad Dardan. c. 3. n. 10. See Matt. 26, 11; 
Mark 14, 7. 

3 So C. Non hoc corpus (45.), ibid.; and Alger, loc. cit. c. 9. 

4 August. Enarrat. in Ps. 98. n. 9, and Can. cit. 

5 Not found in Augustine, but in Lanfranc, de Corp. et sang. Dom. c. 10. 
In C. Hoc est quod dicimus (48.), ibid. 



I30 APPENDIX 

that the sacrifice of the Church is consummated by two things and 
<:onsists of two things ; the visible form of the elements, and the invis- 
ible flesh and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ; the sacrament and 
in that which the sacrament symbolizes, that is, the body of Christ; 
just as the person of Christ consists and is composed of God and 
man, since Christ is very God and man, because everything contains 
in itself the nature and truth of those things, of which it consists. 
Now the sacrifice of the Church consists of two parts : the sacrament, 
and the thing of the sacrament, that is, the body of Christ. There is 
therefore the sacrament and the thing of the sacrament (res sacra- 
menti), that is the body of Christ." — See, he said the invisible flesh 
•of Christ, because, it is received and given, hidden under the form 
of bread. Likewise, he said that the body of Christ is the sacrament 
and the thing ; and this confirms what we said above.^ Then he adds 
what moves the reader more: "That is his flesh," he says, "which 
Tiidden under the form of bread, we receive in the sacrament ; and his 
iblood, which we drink under the form and taste of wine. That is, 
flesh is the sacrament of flesh and blood of blood; and in the flesh 
and blood, both of which are invisible, intelligible and spiritual, is 
signified the visible and palpable body of Christ, full of grace and 
divine majesty." 

Pay careful attention to these things, because Augustine here 
uses a certain figure of speech in which things which signify other 
things often receive the names of the things which they signify. For 
bere the visible form of bread is called by the name of flesh and the 
visible form of wine by the name of blood. But the flesh of Christ 
is said to be invisible and intelligible, because in that form the flesh 
is not seen, but is known; so also the blood. The invisible flesh 
therefore is said to be the sacrament of the visible flesh because the 
form of bread, under which that flesh is not visible, is the sacrament 
of the visible flesh, for by the invisible flesh, that is, by the form, in 
which the flesh of Christ does not appear as flesh, is signified the body 
of Christ, which is visible and palpable, when it appears in its own 
form. So also should we understand in the case of the blood. 
Augustine^ also confirms this sense, showing how the preceding 

1 Dist. VIII. c. 7. — Passage following is in can. cit. and in Lanfranc, loc. cit. 
•c. 14. 

2 Can. cit. but §2. The last passage of this chapter is Augustine, Epist. 98. 
(alias 23.) ad Bonifac. Episc. n. 9. 



DISTINCTION X 131 

statements are to be understood, — because he had spoken obscurely 
— saying accordingly that the bread is called the body of Christ when 
really it is the sacrament of the body of Christ which was crucified ; 
just as that sacrifice which is performed by the hands of the priest is 
called the passion of Christ, not in the actuality of the fact, but in 
the mystery of the symbol ; and as "Faith is called the sacrament of 
faith." 

PART 11 

This is a sufficient reply to heretics and the objections of those 
who deny that the true body of Christ is on the altar, and that the 
bread is changed into the body or the wine into blood by the mystical 
consecration, saying: "Who would dare to eat his Lord? Who also 
would dare to say that the body of Christ is daily formed of matter 
or substance, which were not the flesh of the Virgin ?" 

II. Of the testimonies of the Saints by which he proves that the 
true body of Christ is on the altar. 

These and similar objections are made by those who seek eagerly 
the natural law in the divine mystery; whose perfidy the following 
testimonies reveal. For the Truth says^ : "Take ye, this is my body." 
Also, Ambrose^: "If the prayer of Elijah had such power that it 
could bring down fire from heaven^ ; will not the prayer of Christ 
be of sufficient power to change substances? Of the creation of the 
whole world we read : 'That he spoke, and they were made,' * etc. 
Therefore the Word that is, the Son, who could create out of nothing 
that which was not, can not he change those things which are, into 
those which they were not ? For it is not less to create than to change 
things into a new character." Also: "If we are looking for the 
regular order, a woman is wont to bring forth offspring from union 
with a man. Therefore it is evident that the Virgin brought forth 
outside the order of nature ; and this body which we produce is from 
the Virgin. Why therefore do you seek the order of nature in the 



1 Matt. 26, 26. 

^ De Mysteriis, c. 9. n. 52; following passage, n. 53; third n. 54; these three 
passages are in C. Revera mirahile (69.), ibid. §2. 
3 III Kings I, 14. 
* Ps. 148, 5. 



132 APPENDIX 

body of Christ since he himself was born of the Virgin, outside the 
order of nature?" — Also: ''Before the benediction, another form is 
mentioned, after consecration the body is signified. Before conse- 
cration another thing is mentioned, after consecration, blood is 
named. You say 'Amen/ that is, *it is true.' What the words say, 
let the emotions feel." Also, Augustine^ : "In the forms of bread and 
wine which we see, we honor invisible things, that is, flesh and blood ; 
nor do we regard these two forms, as we regarded them before con- 
secration, when we confess faithfully that before consecration they 
were bread and wine which nature formed; but after consecration, 
the flesh and blood of Christ which the benediction consecrated." 
Also, Ambrose^: "Bread is used on the altar, before the sacred 
words, when the consecration takes place, the bread becomes the 
flesh of Christ. But how can that which is bread, be the body of 
Christ? By the consecration, which is performed in the words of 
Christ." The same: "If there is such power in the words of the 
Lord, that things should begin to be, which before were not; how 
much more can they bring it about that things which were should 
continue to be, and be changed into something else? And so that 
which was bread before the consecration, now after the consecra- 
tion is the body of Christ, because the words of Christ change the 
creature ; and so bread becomes the body of Christ, and wine mixed 
with water in the chalice becomes the blood by the consecration of 
the heavenly words." Likewise, Augustine^ : "Just as the true flesh 
of Christ was created by the holy Spirit without sexual intercourse, 
so by the same Spirit the same body and blood of Christ are conse- 
crated from the substance of bread and wine. The body of Christ is. 
both the truth and the figure : the truth, inasmuch as the body and 
blood of Christ are made from the substances of bread and wine by 
the virtue of the holy Spirit; while the figure is that which is out- 
wardly perceived." Likewise, Eusebius Emissenus^: "The invis- 



1 Can. Nos autem (41.), ibid.; cf. Lanfranc, loc. cit. c. 13. 

2 Lib. IV. de Sacram. c. 4. n. 14; following passage ibid. n. 15; these two 
passages are in C. Pants est (55.), ibid. 

3 Can. Utrum sub figura (72.), ibid.; cf. Paschasius Radb., de Corp. et sang.. 
Christi, c. 4. n. i. 

* Can. Quia corpus (35.), ibid. Verbotenus in Serm. 4. de Corp. et sang> 
Dom. n. 3. (among the works of Isidore and Jerome). 



DISTINCTION X 133 

ible priest by his word and secret power changes the visible creatures 
into the substance of his body and blood/* — From these and from 
many other statements, it is plain that the true body and blood of 
Christ are on the altar; nay rather the entire Christ is there under 
both forms, and the substance of the bread is changed into his body, 
and the substance of the wine into his blood. 



Distinction XI 

PART I 

I. Of the manner of conversion. 

But if anyone asks what the nature of that conversion is, whether 
of form, or of substance, or of some other sort; I am not able to 
define. I know however that it is not of form, because the appear- 
ances of the things remain what they were before, and the taste and 
the weight. To some it seems to be a change of substance, for they 
say that substance is so converted into substance, that the latter 
becomes the former in essence. With this opinion the foregoing^ 
authorities seem to agree. 

But others make the following objection to this opinion: if the 
substance of bread, they say, or of wine is converted in substance 
into the body or blood of Christ, a substance is daily made the body 
or blood of Christ, which previously was not ; and to-day there is a 
body of Christ, which yesterday was not; and daily the body of 
Chri&t is increased and formed of material, of which at its conception 
it was not made. — To these we can reply as follows: that the body 
of Christ is not said to be made by the divine words in the sense that 
the very body formed when the Virgin conceived is formed again, 
but that the substance of bread or wine which formerly was not the 
body or blood of Christ, is, by the divine words, made his body and 
blood. And therefore priests are said to make the body and blood 
of Christ, because by their ministry the substance of bread is made 
the flesh, and the substance of wine is made the blood of Christ; 
yet nothing is added to his body or blood, nor is the body or blood of 
Christ increased. 

II. How the body of Christ is said to be made from the substance 

of bread. 

"But if you ask in what manner this can take place, I will reply 
briefly : It is salutary to believe the mystery of faith, it is not salutary 



* Dist. X., last chapter. 

134 



DISTINCTION XI 135 

to investigate it." * The fact, therefore, that the body of Christ i^ 
not increased by the change of the bread into it, nor the blood from 
the change of the wine, should be ascribed to his will and power, 
who brought forth the same body from the Virgin; therefore the 
one substance is made without increasing the other. Some how- 
ever do not admit that the substance of bread ever becomes the flesh 
of Christ, although the flesh of Christ is produced ; as flour becomes 
bread and water wine, yet we do not say : flour is bread and water is 
wine. — But others admit that that which was bread or wine, after the 
consecration is body and blood ; yet it does not follow that the bread 
is the flesh of Christ or the wine his blood, because the substance of 
bread or wine, after it becomes the flesh or blood of Christ is not the 
substance of bread or wine, but the flesh and blood. It therefore 
seems necessary to distinguish when we say : the substance of breads 
or that which was bread, now is the body of Christ — for remaining 
bread it is not the body of Christ — but being changed into that which 
it has become, it is the body of Christ. Nor do we say that the sub- 
stance of bread or of wine is the matter of the body or blood, because 
the body is not formed of it as of matter, but the former is converted 
into the latter, and is made the latter. Wherefore Augustine^ : "We 
call that the body of Christ, which being received from the fruits 
of the earth and consecrated in the mystical prayer, we receive in 
memory of the Lord's passion. But, since through the hands of man 
it is brought to that visible appearance, it is not sanctified so as to 
be a worthy sacrament save by the invisible operation of the Spirit 
of God." 

But some say that we must understand the conversion as follows, 
that under those accidents, under which there was formerly the sub- 
stance of bread and wine, there is after consecration the substance 
of the body and blood ; but so, that it is not affected by the accidents. 
And thus they assert the said bread changes into the body of Christ, 
because where there was bread, there is now the body of Christ. 
If this is so, what then becomes of the substance of the bread and 
wine? They say that it is dissolved into the earlier matter, or 
reduced to nothing. — But others have thought that the substance of 



* Cf. Alger, Ide Sacram, c. 9; what follows is from Sum. Sent, tr. 6, c 4. 

* Lib. III. de Trin. c. 4. n. 10; and C. Corpus et sanguinem (60.), de Con- 
secrat. dist. 2. 



136 APPENDIX 

bread and wine remained there, and that the body and blood of 
Christ were also there, and that in the sense that the one substance 
is said to become the other, that where the one is, the other is also; 
which is strange; and they say that the very substance of bread or 
wine itself is the sacrament. — But that there is no substance there, 
save the body and blood of Christ is clearly shown by what has been 
said above and by the following. For Ambrose says^ : "This bread 
which we receive in the mystery, I understand to be that which by 
the hand of the holy Spirit was formed in the womb of the Virgin 
and which by the fire of the passion was baked upon the altar of the 
cross. For the bread of angels is become the food of men ; where- 
fore he says^: *I am the living bread, which came down from 
heaven' ; and again^ : The bread which I will give you is my flesh, 
for the life of the world.' For from these two sentences it is clearly 
given us to know, that that bread and this are not two, but the one 
bread and the one flesh without doubt become one body, that same 
truly, and certainly, which was received from the Virgin, which rose 
again and ascended into heaven." Likewise Gregory* : "Who of the 
faithful can doubt, that in the very hour of sacrifice the heavens are 
opened to the voice of the priest, that in that mystery of Christ the 
choirs of angels are present, that the highest and the lowest are 
joined together, that the visible and the invisible are made one?" 
The same^ : *Tn the same moment it is both carried off into heaven 
by the ministry of angels to be united to the body of Christ and 
appears on the altar before the eyes of the priest. Just as the 
Divinity of the Word fills all the world, so that body is consecrated 
in many places; yet there are not many bodies of Christ, but one 
body and one blood. Therefore whether a man receives more or less 
of it, all equally receive the body of Christ entire." — After the conse- 
cration therefore the substance of the bread and wine is not there, 
although the appearance remains. For the appearance of bread and 



^ Gathered from Lib. de Mysteriis c. 9, and IV. de Sacram. c. 4; in C. Omnia 
quaecumgue (74.) Cf. Petr. Chrysolog. Serm. 67. n. 10. 

2 John 6, 51. 

3 John 6, 52. 

* Lib. IV. Dialog, c. 58; and C. Quid sit sanguis (73.), ibid. §1, and §2. also 
for, the following passage. 

6 Fpund in Alcuin, de Divinis officiis c. 40; he cites Gregory, but the words 
at least are not found there. 



DISTINCTION XI 137 

wine is there as also the taste ; wherefore one thing is seen, another 
is understood. 

PART II 

III. Why under another appearance. 

Moreover Christ gave his flesh and blood under another appear- 
ance and ordained that it be thenceforth so received, for three rea- 
sons, that is, so that faith might have merit, which believes those 
things which are not seen; because "faith does not possess merit, 
where human reason permits proof." ^ And also for this reason, 
that the spirit should not abhor what the eye discerns, because we are 
not accustomed to eat raw flesh, and drink blood. Also because it is 
not right that Christ should be eaten with the teeth, he gave his 
flesh and blood to us in a mystery. And also on this account, lest the 
Christian religion be insulted by the unbelieving. Wherefore 
Augustine^ : "Nothing is more reasonable than that we should re- 
ceive the likeness of blood; that so neither the truth should be 
absent, nor ridicule should be made by pagans, because we drink the 
blood of a slain man." Lest therefore this should happen, "and lest 
for instance there be some sort of horror of blood; we receive the 
sacrament in a symbol." — From the preceding it is now evident, why 
under another appearance and why under this particular one the 
Lord celebrated this sacrament, and ordained it to be celebrated by 
us. 

IV. Why under two species. 

But why is it received under two species since in either Christ 
is contained entire? "That it might be shown, that he assumed the 
whole human nature, that he might redeem it all. For bread is 
related to flesh, wine to the soul, because wine becomes blood, where 
the seat of the soul is said by physicians to be situated. On this 
account therefore the Eucharist is celebrated in two forms, that the 
receiving of soul and flesh by Christ, and the redemptioin of both in 



1 Gregory, II. Homil. in Evang., homil. 26. n. i ; cf . Sum. Sent. tr. 6. c. 4. 

2 Can. Utrum sub figura (72.), ibid. §2., taken from Paschas. Radb., de 
Corp. et sang. Domini, c. 13. The following opinion is from C. Panis est (55.), 
loc. cit., from Ambrose, IV. de Sacram. c. 4. n. 20. 



138 APPENDIX 

us may be signified." ^ For what we receive, as Ambrose^ says, 
"has power to preserve the body and the soul ; because the flesh of 
Christ was offered for the salvation of our body and the blood for 
our soul, just as Moses foreshadowed it. The flesh," he says, "is 
offered for our body, blood for our soul," but yet "it is received 
under both species,^ because it is effective for both, because 
Christ is received entire under both. But if it were received under 
one only it would signify that it had power for the one only, that is, 
soul or body, not for both equally. But under both species Christ is 
received entire; nor is more received under both or less under one 
alone." "For there is the same characteristic," as Hilary^ says, "in 
the body of Christ, which formerly existed in the manna, concerning 
which it is said: 'Whoever collected more, did not have more, nor 
did he who got ready less, have less.' " ^ And although the whole 
Christ is received under both species, yet there is no change of bread, 
save into flesh, nor of wine save into blood; nor should they be 
called two sacraments, but one, because under both species is the 
same thing received ; nor ought the sacrament be repeated,^ because 
the benediction is not repeated over the same species ; nor ought 
other substances be offered for the sacrifice of truth, because from 
others the body and blood of Christ cannot be consecrated. 

V. Why water is mixed with it. 

But water should be mixed with wine, because water signifies'' 
the people, who are redeemed by the passion of Christ. "Therefore 
the Lord's cup according to the precept of the canons ought to be 
offered with water mixed in the wine; because we see that in the 
water the people are understood, and in the wine the blood of Christ 
is shown. When therefore in the cup water is mixed with wine, the 
people are joined to Christ, and the company of believers are united 
to him in whom they believe, which union of water and wine is so 



1 Glossa ad I. Cor. 11, 26, in Lyranus. 

2 Comment, in I. Cor. 11, 26; see Deut. 12, 23 (cf. Lev. 17, 11.) 
^ Cf. Sum. Sent. tr. 6. c. 6, whence this opinion is taken. 

* Can. Ubi pars (78.), ibid.; the same opinion is found in Isidore, Serm. 4 
de Corp. et sang. Dom. n. 8. 

» Exod. 16, 18. 

• Cf. Sum. Sent. loc. cit. 

' Apoc. 17, 15. Following passage from C. Cum omne (7.), ibid. §1. 



DISTINCTION XI 139 

commingled in the cup of Christ, that the mixture cannot be separ- 
ated. For if anyone offers wine only, the blood of Christ is there 
without us." 

But if it be asked, whether the act is invalid, if water is left 
out; hear what follows in this same canon: "The cup of the Lord," it 
says, "cannot be water alone, or wine alone, but both mixed." Like- 
wise Cyprian^ : "The cup of the Lord is not water alone, or wine 
alone, but both mixed ; just as the body of the Lord cannot be flour 
alone, nor water alone, unless both be united, and kneaded into one 
loaf." But if anyone who does not intend to introduce heresy, leaves 
out the water by forgetfulness or ignorance, it does not seem that 
the sacrament is invalid, but he should be severely rebuked. For the 
Church of the Greeks also is said not to add water. Which opinion 
it seems can also be gathered from the sayings of Cyprian. For he 
says: "If any of our predecessors either ignorantly or in simplicity 
has not given heed to this, which the Lord taught us to do both by 
example and by precept, he can be pardoned for his simplicity by the 
indulgence of the Lord. But we cannot be forgiven, who have now 
been taught by the Lord that we should offer the cup of the Lord 
mixed with wine just as that which the Lord offered." — And this 
seems to mean that if anyone simply or ignorantly offers wine with- 
out water, he completes the sacrament. But water can never be 
offered without wine for the sacrifice, nor bread unless of wheat, 
nor a grain of wheat, unless it be made into bread; because Christ 
both called himself bread, and compared himself to a grain of wheat.^ 
Therefore what was said above, to the effect that wine alone cannot 
be offered, ought to be explained; for it allows an exception: it 
cannot be done, unless it is done in simplicity or ignorance, or it 
cannot, that is, it ought not to be done. To some persons however 
this rule seems to be universally true. 

VI. Of what nature the body was which Christ gave to his dis- 
ciples in the supper. 

It is also to be gathered from the authorities previously men- 
tioned, that Christ gave the disciples wine mixed with water. But 



* Epist. 63. n. 13, and C. Sic in sanctificando (2.), ibid. Below, the words 
are from ibid. n. 17, and the following canon. 
2 John 6, 48. and 12, 24. 



I40 APPENDIX 

he gave his body of the nature, as he then had it, that is, mortal and 
capable of suffering; but now it is received by us immortal and 
beyond suffering ; yet it does not have more efficiency. The Euchar- 
ist also by intinction ought not to be given to the people for a 
supplement of the communion,^ because Christ is not said to have 
offered a sop to any of the disciples, except to Judas. Judas did 
not then receive the body of Christ, but only bread; for he had 
received the body and blood of Christ before, with the other dis- 
ciples. 



^ C. Cum omne (7.), ibid. §1. Concerning Judas, cf. August., in loan. Evang. 
tr. 62. n. 3, and Sura. Sent. loo. cit. n. 9. 



Distinction XII 

PART I 

I. Whereon these accidents are based. 

But if we are asked concerning the accidents which remain, that 
is, concerning the appearance and taste and weight, upon what sub- 
ject they are based ; it seems better to me to confess that they exist 
without the subject, than that they are in the subject; because there 
is there no substance, except that of the body and blood of the Lord,; 
which is not affected by these accidents. For the body of Christ has 
no such form in itself, but such as will appear in the judgment. 
There remain therefore these accidents subsisting by themselves for 
the rite of the mystery, for the support of taste and faith, by whicb 
accidents the body of Christ having its own form and nature is 
hidden.! 

II. Of the fraction and distribution. 

We are also often asked concerning the fraction and distribution, 
which seem to be performed there, whether they be real ; and if there 
is a true fraction, of what thing it is, or wherein it is performed. 
And since there is no other substance there than that of Christ, if 
this fraction is in any substance, it seems to be in the body of Christ. 
— But on the contrary, since his body is incorruptible, because it is« 
immortal and incapable of suffering, it does not seem that the^ 
fraction can be therein. For Christ also refuted^ the carnal under- 
standing of the disciples, who thought that the flesh of Christ just 
as any other was to be divided into parts, and torn to pieces witb 
their teeth. Therefore some are of the opinion that there does not 
take place the fraction, which appears; but the body is said to be 
broken, because it seems to be broken. — To them we may reply in; 
the words of Ambrose^ : "Nothing false must be thought of the sacri- 



1 Cap. I from Sum. Sent. tr. 6. c. 4, and the following chapter from c. 8. 

2 John 6, 62. 

3 In Glossa ad I. Cor. 11, 24, in Lyranus. 

141 



142 APPENDIX 

fice of truth; like what occurs in the deceptions of the sorcerers, 
where the eyes are deceived by some delusion, so that they see what 
is not." — To this some say : **Our sight does not deceive us, nor is 
it deceived as it would be if we believed that the body is so broken, 
as it seems to be, nor is the act all illusion, because it is done for the 
advantage of faith, not for deception; even as also Christ showed 
himself to the two disciples on the way in the form of a stranger^ ; 
yet he did not have such a form, but 'their eyes were holden, lest 
they recognize him/ — But others say that just as the appearance of 
bread is there, and there is not the thing to which or in which this 
form belongs ; so there is a fraction, which is not performed on 
anything, because nothing is there broken ; and they say this fraction 
is done miraculously in the power of God, so that there may be a 
breaking there, where nothing is broken. 

III. Of the confession of Berengar. 

Others teach that the body of Christ is broken and divided in 
its essence, and yet exists entire and incorruptible. They assert that 
they gather this from the confession of Berengar, who confessed in 
the presence of Pope Nicholas and many bishops^ that "the bread 
and wine which are placed upon the altar, after consecration are not 
only the sacrament, but also the true body and blood of Christ ; and 
that in a sensual manner, not only as the sacrament, but in truth, 
they are handled and broken in the hands of the priests and are 
crushed by the teeth of the faithful." 

But because the body of Christ is incorruptible, this fraction 
and distribution can rightly be said to be performed not on the sub- 
stance of the body, but sacramentally on the form of the bread, that 
there may be a true fraction and distribution performed not on the 
substance of the body, but on the sacrament, that is, on the species. 
But do not marvel or taunt if the accidents seem to be broken when 
they are there without a subject; although some assert that they are 
founded on the air! The true fraction and distribution are there, 
which are performed on the bread, that is, on the species of bread. — 



* Lk. 24, 16. 

*Can. Ego Berengarius (42.), de Consecrat. dist. 2 and Lanfranc, de Eu- 
charistiae Sacram. c. 2. 



DISTINCTION XII 143 

Wherefore the Apostle^ says, "The bread which we break/' — ^be- 
cause the appearance of bread is there broken, and divided into parts, 
but Christ remains entire, and in his entirety is present in each part. 
Wherefore Augustine: "When Christ is eaten, life is eaten. But 
who would dare to eat his Lord ? And yet the Truth inviting us to 
eat says : 'Whoever eateth me, lives on account of me.' ^ Nor is 
Christ slain that he may be eaten, but he gives life to the dead, when 
he is eaten ; he makes anew, he does not die ; eaten he lives, because 
dead he arose; nor when we eat, do we divide him, and this is 
certainly the case in the sacrament." The same^ : "The faithful know 
in what way they eat the flesh of Christ ; everyone receives his part, 
wherefore also grace itself is said to be in parts. It is eaten in parts, 
and the whole remains entire; it is eaten in parts in the sacra- 
ment, and the whole remains entire in heaven, the whole remains 
entire in thy heart." — "Therefore these are called sacraments, 
because in them one thing is seen, and another is understood" ; 
the bread is seen and the cup, and the eyes report them because 
moreover faith requires to be taught: the bread is the body of 
Christ, the cup is his blood. — From these authorities we under- 
stand that the fraction and the parts which there appear, are 
in the sacrament, that is, in the visible form. And therefore these 
words of Berengar are to be interpreted, that not only "in a sensual 
manner, in the sacrament, but in truth, the body of Christ is said 
to be touched by the hands of the priests; and broken and chewed 
by the teeth," in truth certainly but only in the sacrament. Therefore 
the chewing and distribution there are real; but in each part is the 
whole Christ. Wherefore Jerome* : "Each receives Christ the Lord, 
and in the single parts he is entire ; nor is he diminished in a single 
portion, but he offers himself entire in each." Likewise Hilary: 
"Where a part of his body is, there is the whole." 



» I. Cor. 10, 16. — Following passage is not in Augustine, but in Bede, I. Cor. 
10, 16, and in the Glossa of Lyranus; in C. Invitat Dominus (70.), ibid. 

» John 6, 58. 

3 From the same references, and C. Qui manducant (58.), ibid.; same ref- 
erence §2 for the following passage. 

* Can. Singuli accipiunt (77.), ibid., and Alger, I. de Sacram. etc. c. 15, 
which is taken from Gregory, libr. Sacrament. Praefatio Dom. 5. post Theo- 
phaniam n. 174. Following passage is C. Uhi pars (78.), ibid. 



144 APPENDIX 

IV. What these parts signify, .: <: : -^ 

Moreover as to what these parts signify, Pope Sergius^ teaches, 
saying: *'Of three forms is the body of Christ: the part offered, 
poured into the cup, shows the body of Christ which has now ri^en ; 
the part eaten testifies to him as walking here still on earth ; the part 
remaining on the altar to the end of the Mass signifies the body lying 
in the tomb, because to the end of the world the bodies of the saints 
will be in their tombs." And just as these parts have a mystical 
signification, so also the fraction is the representation of the pkssiori 
and death of Christ, wherefore he himself says, "This do in rCttierri- 
brance of Me,^ that is, in memory of my passion and death." 'For 
as Ambrose says, "because we are freed in the death of Christ, we 
ought to remember him in eating and drinking his flesh ahd blood." 
— But let anyone beware lest he receive unworthily, because 'he eats 
condemnation to himself.' ^ "For this is not that bread which passes 
into the body, but the bread of life eternal, which supports the sub- 
stance of our souls." * "Therefore so live, that daily you may de- 
serve to receive," and may not approach unworthily. "He is 
unworthy, who celebrates the mystery otherwise than as Christ 
taught," or who approaches when he is in mortal sin. "Therefore 
although there be deadly sins, in order that they be not mortal, before 
you approach, forgive your debtors. If you forgive, it will be for- 
given you ; and thus go safely. For it is the bread of salvation, not 
a poison." If you go thus, you eat spiritually; "for he eats spirit- 
ually, who brings innocence to the altar." 

PART II 

V. Whether Christ he sacrificed on the altar daily, and whether 

what is done by the priests is a sacrifice. 

After these considerations we are asked if what the priest does 



*Can. Triforme (22.), ibid., ex Glossa ad I. Cor. 11, 24, in Lyranus and 
Sum. Sent. loc. cit. c. 9. 

* I. Cor. II, 24; cf. Glossa, ibid., and Ambrose, Commentary, oh the same 
passage, .V. 26; also C. Quia morte (50.), ibid. 

3 I. Cor. II, 29. . - 

• - * Ambrose, V. de Sacram. c. 4. n. 24; the second^ ibid. n. 25,. cf. C. Non iste 
pants (56),. ibid.; third, Comment, cit. v. 27; the following are August., in loan. 
Evang. tr. 26. n. 11,. and C. Panem coelestem (64.), ibid;. 



DISTINCTION XII 145 

is properly called a sacrifice or an immolation, and if Christ is daily 
sacrificed, or was only sacrificed once.— To this question we can 
reply briefly, that that which is offered and consecrated by the priest 
is called a sacrifice and oblation, because it is a memorial and a repre- 
sentation of the true sacrifice and of the holy immolation made on 
the altar of the cross. And Christ died once on the cross, where he 
was sacrificed in his own person ; but daily he is sacrificed in the 
sacrament, because in the sacrament a remembrance is made of that 
which was done once. Wherefore Augustine^ : "We are certain that 
'Christ rising again from the dead, dieth now no more,' etc. ; yet, lest 
we forget what was once done, it is done again every year in our 
memory, that is, as often as Easter is celebrated. How often, da 
you suppose, does Christ die? But the anniversary remembrance 
only represents what was done aforetime, and moves us, as if we- 
should see the Lord on the cross." The same^ : "Christ was once 
sacrificed in his own person, and yet daily is he sacrificed in the 
sacrament; which is to be understood thus, that in the manifestation 
of his body and in the distinction of his members once only he hung 
on the cross, offering himself to God the Father as an efficient victim 
of redemption, for those, that is, whom he had predestined." Like- 
wise Ambrose^ : "In Christ the victim sufficient unto salvation was 
once offered. What therefore do we do? Do we not offer every 
day? Even if we offer daily, we do it as a remembrance of his 
death; and the victim is one, not many. How one, and not many? 
Because Christ was sacrificed only once. But our sacrifice is a copy 
of his ; the same and always the same is offered, therefore this is the 
same sacrifice; otherwise it would be said, because it is offered in 
many places: *Are there many Christs?' No, but one Christ is 
everywhere, existing here complete and there complete : just as that 
which is everywhere offered is one body, so also is it one sacrifice. 
Christ offered the victim; and we offer the same now, but what 
we do is a remembrance of his sacrifice." "Nor is it repeated be- 



1 In Ps. 21. Enarrat, 2. n. i, and C Semel Christus (51.), de Gonsecrat. dist. 
2. See Rom. 6, 9. 

2 Can. Semel immolatus est (52.), ibid., and Alger, I. de Sacram. c. 16, who 
took his opinion from Augustine, Ep. 98 (alias 23) ad Bonifac. episc. n. 9. 

- 3 Can. In Christo\semei (53.), ibid., ,and Rabanus, Comment, in Epist. ad 
Hebr. 10, i ; cf. also Chrysostom, hom. 13. on the same passage n. 3. 



146 APPENDIX 

cause of a weakness in itself, for it makes man perfect, but because 
of our weakness, because we sin daily." — From these quotations we 
gather that what is done on the altar is also called a sacrifice ; and 
Christ was offered once long ago, and is offered daily, but in one way 
then, in another now; and also we are shown what is the virtue of 
this sacrament, remission, that is, of venial sins, and the perfecting 
of virtue. 

VI. Of the cause of its institution. 

For this sacrament was instituted for two reasons; for the in- 
crease of virtue, that is, of charity, and as a medicine for daily 
infirmity. Wherefore Ambrose^ : "If as often as the blood of Christ 
is shed, it is shed for the remission of sins ; I ought always to receive 
it; I who continually sin, ought continually to have the medicine." 
Also Augustine^: "This oblation is repeated daily, although Christ 
suffered once, because daily we commit sins, without which mortal 
infirmity cannot live. And because we fall daily, daily is Christ 
sacrificed mystically for us." "For he gave us this sacrament of 
salvation, so that, because we sin daily, and he cannot die again, we 
might obtain remission through this sacrament. Daily he is truly 
eaten and drunk, but he remains whole and alive." Likewise: "It 
is called the mystery of faith, because you ought to believe that upon 
it our salvation rests." 

If moreover anyone asks whether we should daily communicate, 
hear what St. Augustine says of it^ : "Daily," he says, "to receive the 
Eucharist, is a practice I neither praise, nor condemn; however I 
urge that persons should communicate every Lord's day. But if 
the mind is in the disposition to sin, I say that it is rather burdened 
than purified by the receiving of the Eucharist. And although any- 
one be grieved with sin; if he does not have the will to sin in the 
future, and makes satisfaction with tears and prayers, let him 



* Lib. IV. de Sacram. c. 6. n. 28, and C. Si quotiescumque (14.), ibid. 

' Can. Uirum sub figura (72.), ibid. §1, and Paschasius, de Corpore et sang. 
Dom. c. 9. Following passage, C. Quid sit sanguis (73.), ibid. §4. Third, ibid, 
immediately above. 

• (Gennad.) de Ecclesiast. Dogmat. c. 23, and C. Quotidie (13.), ibid. Fol- 
lowing passage, C. Etsi non frequentius (16), ibid. Third, C. Peracta consecratione 
(10.), ibid. 



DISTINCTION XII 147 

approach secure, but I say this of him who is not burdened by mortal 
sins." — "If not more frequently, at least three times a year let 
men communicate, unless by chance someone is hindered by crimes : 
at Easter, that is, and Pentecost, and at Christmas." "Let all there- 
fore communicate, who do not wish to be outside the doors of the 
Church." 



Distinction XIII 

I. IVhethrr thU sacrament is administcrrd by heretics and excom- 
municated persons. 

We are also often asked whether wicked priests can administer 
this sacrament. — To this we may answer that some priests, although 
they are evil, consecrate tnily. that is. those who are within the 
Church in name and in sacrament, even if not in life : because the 
consecration is effected not by the merit of the consecrant, but by the 
word of the Creator: wherefore Augustine^: "Within the Catholic 
Church, in the mystery of the body and blood of the Lord, nothing 
more is accomplished by a good priest, nothing less by a bad priest, 
because the consecration is not by the merit of the consecrant, but by 
the word of the Creator; and by the virtue of the holy Spirit. For 
it must be believed that the sacraments are administered in the words 
of Christ. Just as it is he himself who baptizes, so it is he who by the 
holy Spirit makes his own tlesh and blood." Also Gregory--: "Some 
think that the communion of the body is less sanctified, if priests 
officiate whose lives seem to their eyes ignoble. Alas! into what a 
great snare do they fall, when they believe that divine and occult mys- 
teries can be made more sanctified by other men. whereas one and 
the same holy Spirit in the whole Church invisibly sanctifies these 
mysteries by his operation, and blesses them by his sanctification ! 
Therefore it is called a mystepk'. because it has a secret and hidden 
dispensation : also a sacrifice as a holy thing is perfonned. for in tlie 
mystic prayer a sacrifice is sanctified for us in memor>' of the Lord's 
passion. A sacrament occurs in any celebration, when one thing is 
accomplished through another thing so that we receive something 
of the thing signified. The sacraments are : baptism, chrism, the 
body of Christ, and these are called sacraments for the reason that 
under the cover of visible things the divine virtue secretly works 
the sah-ation of the same sacraments ; wherefore, they are called 
sacraments from secret or sacred virtues. The sacrament of the bread 
and cup is called Eucharistia in Greek, interpreted in Latin bona 
ffratia: and what better than the body and blood of Christ ? Whether 

^ Can. Intra catkolicam ^77.), C. i. q. i. and Alger, III. de Sacram. c. 8. 
* Can. Multi sa^cularium (84.), ibid. — The greater part of this passage is 
found in Isidore, VI. Et^^llologies, c. 19. n. 38. flF. 

148 



DISTINCTION XIII 149 

therefore it is dispensed by good or by bad ministers within the 
Church, yet it is a sacrament, because the holy Spirit vivifies it ; nor 
is it increased by the merits of good dispensers, nor lessened by evil. 
This same must be said and believed of the body of the Lord and of 
baptism and chrism ; because divine virtue works secretly in them, 
and this virtue or power is only divine, not human efficacy." 

But those who are excommunicated or clearly branded with 
heresy, do not seem to be able to perform this sacrament, although 
they are priests, because no one says in his consecration: "I oflFer," 
but: "We offer, " as if in the name of the Church. And therefore 
although other sacraments can be celebrated outside the Church, it 
does not seem that this sacrament can be. Which also Augustine^ 
seems to teach saying: "Consider the name, and observe the truth! 
For it is called the mass, because the heavenly messenger comes to 
consecrate the vivified body, according to the word of the priest when 
he says : 'Almighty God, command that this be borne by the hands 
of thy holy angel to thine altar on high,' etc. Therefore unless the 
angel comes, it can in no wise rightly be called a mass. For do you 
suppose if a heretic had dared to usurp this mystery, God would 
send the angel from heaven to consecrate his oblation; especially 
since he has threatened heretics through the prophet saying^ : *I 
will curse your blessings.' And if the Truth asserts that he will 
curse their blessings how will it be with their offering? Therefore 
shall we say that the offering can be blessed by God, when we know 
it to be cursed by God together with their blessing? For if God has 
cursed the blessings of the heretics, and a schismatic has blessed 
them; which of them will prevail? Do you suppose that the blessing 
of the one accursed can reduce to nothing the truest words of the 
threatening God?" 

From these citations we may gather that a heretic cut off from 
the Catholic Church,-^ is unable to perform this sacrament ; because 
the holy angels, who assist in the celebration of this mystery are not 
then present, when a heretic or schismatic recklessly presumes to 
celebrate this mystery. For we may not doubt that where the mys- 

^ Not from Augustine, who rather with the common opinion teaches the 
contrary. Source not foimd. Prayer cited is in the canon of the mass after the 
consecration. 

2 Mai. 2, 2, 

' For the following, cf. Bede, on Luke 24, 4. 



ISO APPENDIX 

teries of the body and blood of the Lord are performed, an assembly 
of the celestial citizens is present. Moreover in the accomplishment of 
this mystery, just as the form should be preserved, so must the order 
be regarded, that is, it is necessary that there be a priest, and the 
intention must be felt that he intends to perform it. — But if he does 
not believe the truth concerning this mystery, do you suppwDse he can 
intend to perform it ? And if he does not intend, do you suppose he 
performs it? — Some even say, that if he does not think rightly of 
this mystery he can intend not indeed to perform it, which would 
then be to believe rightly, but to do that which is done by others when 
the mystery is performed, and thus the intention is present ; and even 
if the intention of performing this mystery may be said to be lacking,, 
nevertheless inasmuch as he intends to say and do things, which are 
done by others, the mystery is accomplished. We can also reason- 
ably say, that the body of Christ is not received by brute animals, 
even if it seems to be. What then does a mouse receive, or what 
does it eat? God knows. — ^Concerning this heavenly mystery we 
have touched lightly upon some points which should be held faith- 
fully by Catholics; for whoever contradicts these things, is judged a 
heretic. 

JI. What constitutes a heretic, and what a heretic is. 

But lest you be ignorant of what constitutes a heretic or what 
a heretic is, hear briefly what the holy doctors teach of it. Hilary 
says^ : "There have been many who recognized the simplicity of the 
heavenly words, not the perfection of the truth itself, interpreting 
them otherwise than as the virtue of the words demands. For heresy 
is in the interpretation, it is not in the Scripture; and the idea not 
the discourse becomes the sin." The same in the seventh booker 
"The idea of the interpretation is to blame." Jerome^ says that 
"heresy comes from words quoted without regard to order." Augus- 
tine, defining what a heretic is, says* : "A heretic is one who produces 
or follows false and new opinions for the sake of some temporal con- 
venience and especially for glory and pre-eminence for himself." 



* Lib. II. de Trin. n. 3. — Following passage, ibid. VII. n. 83, where we find 
his words. A similar idea in ibid. VIII. n. 4 and 1 1. 
' See preceding note. 

'Not found in Jerome. Glossa ad Osee 2, 16. (Lyranus.) 
*Lib. de Utilitate credendi, c. i. n. i. 



Distinction XIV 

PART I 

I. Of penance, and why it is called penance. 

Next we must discuss penance. Penance is needful to those who 
are far from God, that they may come near. For it is, as Jerome^ 
says, "the second plank after shipwreck" ; because if anyone by sin- 
ning sullies the robe of innocence received in baptism, he can restore 
it by the remedy of penance. The first plank is baptism, where the 
old man is laid aside and the new put on; the second, penance, by 
which after a fall we rise again, while the old state which had re- 
turned is disdained, and the new one which had been lost is resumed. 
Those who have lapsed after baptism can be restored by penance, 
but not by baptism. A man is allowed to do penance often, but not 
to be baptized often. Baptism is called only a sacrament, but pen- 
ance is called both a sacrament and virtue of the mind. For there 
is an inner penance, and an outer: the outer is the sacrament, the 
inner is the virtue of the mind; and both are for the sake of salva- 
tion and justification. — But whether all outer penance is a sacrament, 
or if not all, what is to be classed under this name, we shall investi- 
gate later. 2 — With penance began the preaching of John who said: 
"Do penance, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." "And what 
the herald taught, the Truth afterwards preached, beginning his dis- 
course with penance." 

II. What penance is, and what it is to do penance. 

"It is called penance from punishment, for by it a man punishes- 
the sins which he has committed. The virtue of penance is conceived 
in fear." Wherefore Isaiah^ : "By the fear of thee, oh Lord, have we 



^ Ep, 130, ad Demetriadem (alias 8.) n. 9; cf. Sum. Sent. tr. 6. c. 10. Below,, 
cf. Eph. 4, 22. 24. 

2 Dist. XXII. c. 2. — Following passage of Scripture from Matt. 3, 2 and 
see also 4, 17. — ^What follows to the passage from Ambrose is from the Glossa 
ordinaria ibid. 

' Is. 26, 18. 

151 



152 APPENDIX 

-conceived, and have brought forth the spirit of salvation." "More- 
over penance is, as Ambrose^ says, to lament past evils, and not com- 
mit again what must be lamented." Likewise Gregory^ : "To repent 
is to bewail the sins committed previously, and not to commit what 
must be bewailed. For he who deplores some, so that he may commit 
others, is either as yet ignorant of how to do penance, or he dissem- 
bles. For what value is there if he bewails his ,sins of luxury, and 
yet pants with the fever of avarice?" 

PART II 

Some persons clinging vehemently to these words, contend that 
the truly penitent cannot^ again sin to condemnation ; and if he does 
sin grievously, he did not earlier do true penance. This view they 
even defend by other testimonies. For Isidore says* : "He is a 
scoffer and not a penitent, who still does that of which he repents. 
Nor does he seem to desire to call on God humbly, but to mock him 
proudly : *a dog is returned to his vomit, and the penitent to his sin.' 
Many shed their tears without ceasing, and do not cease to sin. I 
observe that some have tears for penance and have not the effect of 
penance, because in the inconstancy of their mind they now shed 
tears in remembrance of sin ; now when the habit reasserts itself, they 
commit again the things which they bewailed. Isaiah says concerning 
sinners: "Wash yourselves, be clean." He is both washed and is 
clean who both laments the past, and does not again commit the 
deeds he has bewailed. He is washed, and is not clean, who laments 
the things he does, and does not forsake them, and after his tears 
repeats the things which he has wept over." Also Augustine^ : 
^'Penance is vain, which subsequent guilt contaminates entirely. 
Lamentations are of no avail, if sins are repeated. It is of no value 
to ask pardon for sins, and repeat the sins afresh." Also Gregory^ : 
"He who laments what he has committed, yet does not abandon it, 



* (Among his works) Serm. 25. (de s. Quadrag. 9.) n. i ; C. Poenitentia est 
(i.), de Poenitentia dist. 3. 

2 II. Homil. in Evang., horn. 34. n. 15; C. Poenitentiam agere (6.), ibid. 

* Cf. Sum. Sent. tr. 6. c. 12. 

* Lib. II. Sent. c. 16 n. i; C. Irrisor (11.). ibid. Below, see II. Pet. 2, 22, 
and Prov. 26, 11, next Is. i, 16. 

^ Rather Isidore, I. Synonym, n. 77; C. Inanis (12.), ibid. 
^ Regula pastor, p. III. c. 30; C. Qui admissa (i4.)» ibid. 



DISTINCTION XIV 153 

subjects himself to more severe punishment." Also Ambrose^: 
"There are men who think that penance should be done repeatedly, 
who luxuriate in Christ. For if they did penance truly in Christ, 
they would not think that they needed to repeat it afterwards; be- 
cause, just as there is one baptism, so there is one penance." — 
These and many other authorities they use for the support of their 
opinion. But Ambrose says^ : "This is true penance, to cease from 
sin." And again^ : "It is of great profit to renounce error." "For to 
free and purify souls steeped in vice is the work of perfect virtue 
and heavenly grace." * 

And therefore it may be certainly defined : penance is the virtue 
or grace by which we lament and hate the evils committed, with the 
purpose of amendment and do not wish to commit further what must 
be lamented; because true penance is to grieve in spirit and to 
hate the offences. — Wherefore the preceding words: "to do pen- 
ance is to bewail what has been done and not to commit what 
must be bewailed," may be thus rightly understood, that they refer 
not to different times, but to the same time, so that at the time a 
man bewails the sins committed, he does not commit in will or 
in deed what he must bewail ; this is implied in the following words : 
"For whoever thus deplores some things," etc. Hence Augustine 
says^: "We must beware, lest anyone suppose that he may daily 
perpetrate these heinous offences, and redeem them by alms- 
giving, who do such things 'shall not possess the kingdom of 
God.' For life must be changed to better, and by almsgiving God 
may be propitiated for past sins, but not bought in any way, so as to 
allow wrongs to be committed with impunity. For to no one did he 
give freedom to sin, even if by lamenting he wiped out sins com- 
mitted, when the proper satisfaction was not neglected." Also Pope 
Pius^: "It is of no profit to a man to fast and pray, and to do the 
other acts of religion, unless he recalls his mind from iniquity." — 



* Lib. II. de Poenitentia, c. lo. n. 95; C. Reperiuntur (2.), ibid. 

2 Among his works, on II. Ep. ad Cor. 2,7. 

3 Exposit. in Ps. 118, Serm. 22. n. 2. 

* Ibid. n. 3. 

^ Enchirid. c. 70. n. 19; C. Sane cavendum est (18.), ibid. See I. Cor. 6, 
9. 10. 

* Ep. I, and C. NihU prodest (21.), ibid. — Following is taken from the 
Summa Sent. tr. 6. c. 12. 



154 APPENDIX 

Whoever therefore so recalls his mind from evil, that he laments 
what was committed, and does not wish to commit what must be 
lamented, and does not neglect to make satisfaction, does penance 
truly. Nor can it be said that it was not true penance, if after- 
wards, not purposely, but accidentally, or through infirmity, he may 
perhaps sin. But he is a scoffer and not a penitent who laments what 
he has committed, in such a way that he does not cease to commit in 
word and deed what he has lamented. He who repeats after tears 
what he has bewailed, is washed for the time being, but is not clean, 
that is, the cleansing is not sufficient for him unto salvation, because 
it is momentary, not permanent. And also this statement: "Penance 
is in vain, which succeeding sin stains," is thus to be interpreted : It 
is in vain, that is, wanting in the fruit of that penance, which suc- 
ceeding sin stains. For the fruit of penance is the avoiding of 
gehenna and the attainment of glory. And that penance and other 
preceding good deeds are annihilated by the succeeding sin, so that 
they do not obtain the reward which they deserved when they were 
done, and which they would have had if sin had not followed. But 
if penance be done also for that following sin, both the penance 
which preceded and the other previous good deeds revive; but only 
those which sprang from charity. For those deeds alone live, which 
are done in charity; and on that account if they are annihilated by 
following sins, they may revive by subsequent penance. But those 
deeds which are done without charity are brought forth dead and 
void; and therefore they are not able to revive by penance. Sim- 
ilarly this saying is to be understood : "Lamentations avail nothing," 
etc. ; and this : "Nothing is able," etc. For if sins are repeated, pre- 
ceding lamentation avails nothing for salvation or for pardon in the 
end, because nothing is left of the cleanness of life; because either 
the sins which have been remitted return, as some think when they 
are repeated ; or if they do not return, and even though they are for- 
given, the man becomes as guilty and unclean on account of ingrati- 
tude, since he is still involved in sins to be expiated, as if the sins 
already forgiven returned. This question however, that is, whether 
sins return, we shall treat more fully afterwards.^ Likewise it 
avails nothing for obtaining salvation, or for having cleanness of life, 
to ask pardon for evils done, and then to repeat afresh the evils. — In 



iDist. XXIL c. I. 



DISTINCTION XIV 155 

this way must be understood that which Augustine^ says elsewhere : 
''Penance is a sort of vengeance of the one who grieves, always 
punishing in himself what he grieves to have committed." And 
below : ''We should grieve daily for sin, as the very nature of the 
word declares. For to do penance is to do punishment,^ so that one 
may always punish in himself by vengeance what he committed by 
sinning. Now he does punishment, who always avenges what he 
laments that he has committed." "What remains to us, except to 
lament in life? for where grief is ended, penance also is lacking. 
But if penance is ended, what is left of pardon? Let a man praise 
and hope for grace only as long as he is sustained by penance. For 
the Lord says^ : 'Go, and do not desire to sin any more.' He did not 
say, do not sin, but let not the will to sin rise in you. How will this 
commandment be observed, unless grief be continually preserved in 
penance? But let a man always grieve, and rejoice in grief; and 
let it not be enough that he should grieve, but let him grieve from; 
faith, and let him grieve that he has not always grieved." 

Of the penance of the perfect, sufficing even unto salvation, we 
must understand what I said above, that is : "Penance is a vengeance 
always punishing what one has committed" ; and other things of the 
same sort. But this statement: "If penance is finished, nothing is 
left of pardon," may be received in two ways. For if according ta 
the belief of some persons, sins which have been forgiven return, it 
is easy to understand that nothing of pardon is left; because the 
sins forgiven are again repeated. For just as one who is manu- 
mitted from slavery into freedom, for a time* is truly free, and yet 
on account of an offense is afterward returned to slavery; so alsa 
sins are truly remitted in penance, and yet on account of the repeti- 
tion of the offense they return again. — But if the sins are said not to* 
return, it may reasonably be said also that nothing of pardon is left^ 
not because forgiven sins are imputed again, but because on account 



1 De vera et falsa Poenitentia (among his works), c. 8. n. 22; following pas- 
sage, ibid. c. 19. n. 35; both in C. Poenitentia est (4.), ibid. Third, ibid. c. 13. n. 
28; C. Si Apostolus (5.), ibid. 

2 The play on words is lost in the English. The Pseudo- Augustine sayst 
Poenitere enim est poenam tenere ... 

3 John 8, II. 

* Or, again, as Gratian in C. Quamvis caute (22.), ibid., from which this, 
whole explanation is excerpted. 



156 APPENDIX 

of ingratitude the man becomes as guilty and unclean, as if they did 
return. 

III. Of the solemn and single penance. 

Moreover that which Ambrose says, They are repeated, etc.; 
and : Just as there is one baptism, so also there is one penance, is to 
be understood not of the general, but of the special custom of the 
Church for solemn penance, which among some people is once cele- 
brated and not repeated. Also this other passage of Ambrose^ : 
"Penance once performed but not truly celebrated, both robs an 
earlier penance of its fruit and destroys the value of a later" ; is to 
be understood of solemn penance. But solemn penance, as Ambrose 
says in the same passage, is that which is done outside the Church, 
in public, in ashes and sack-cloth, and which is only imposed for 
grievous and horrible and public sins. .\nd this is not to be repeated, 
for reverence of the sacrament that it may not become worthless or 
be made contemptible to men. Wherefore Augustine- : "Although it 
is provided wisely and wholesomely that an opportunity for this 
humble penance be only once granted in the Church, lest the medicine 
be cheap or less useful for the sick, which is the more wholesome, 
the less it is despised : who would yet dare to say to God : *Why dost 
thou spare again the man who after his first penance again binds him- 
self in the snares of iniquity ?' " Origen^ also says of this solemn pen- 
ance, which is enjoined for more serious otTences : "If some mortal 
guilt has befallen us, which does not consist of mortal crime, or of 
blasphemy against the faith, but of some offence of speech or char- 
acter; this guilt can always be repaired, nor is it forbidden to do 
penance for such things ; but not so for more grievous offences. For 
more grievous offences an opportunit}^ for penance is only granted 
once. The common errors which we frequently commit, always 
accept of penance, and always are redeemed." — By common sins he 
means venial sins, and perhaps some mortal sins less grievous than 
others, which, as they are often committed, are frequently also 



^Lib. II. de Poenitentia, c. ii. n. 104; C. In salicibus (37.), ibid.; cf. Sum. 
Sent. tr. 6. c. 12. 

' Ep. 153. (alias 54.) ad Macedonium, c. 3. n. 7; C. Quamvis cauU, supra cit. 

» Homil. 15. in Levit. (25, 29.) n. 2; the Master having omitted much else, 
added the words: but not so concerning more grievous offences. 



DISTINCTION XIV 157 

redeemed through penance. But penance is done only once for more 
serious offences, that is the solemn penance. For these sins also, if 
they are repeated, penance is repeated, but not the solemn penance, 
but this rule however is not observed in some Churches. 

IV. That sins are forgiven frequently by penance. 

But that penance is done not once only, but is frequently re- 
peated, and by it frequently pardon is again afforded ; is proved by 
many testimonies of the saints. For Augustine^ says, writing against 
certain heretics who asserted that penance was useful only once for 
those who sin after baptism : "The faithless still assail us, who know 
more than they should, not sober, but out of bounds ; they say : 'And 
if penance has value for those who sin once after baptism, yet 
repeated it is not of value to those who sin often ; otherwise remis- 
sion would be an encouragement to sin.' For they say : 'Who would 
not always sin, if he could always be restored through penance?' 
For they call the Lord an encourager of evil, if he always aids sin- 
ners ; and says that sins are pleasing to him, for which grace is 
always at hand. But they err. For it is evident that sins much dis- 
please him, who is always ready to destroy them; if he loved 
them, he would not always destroy them." The same to Mace- 
donius- : **To such lengths does the iniquity of men sometimes 
go, even after penance has been performed, and reconciliation 
to the altar, they commit either similar or more grievous sins. 
And yet God causes his sun to rise even upon them, nor does 
he grant less freely than before the most abundant gifts of life 
and salvation. And although an opportunity for penance is not 
granted them in the Church, yet God does not forget his patience 
towards them. If anyone of their number should say to you: Tell 
me whether it avails anything for a future life, if in this life I have 
contempt for the most enticing allurements of pleasure, if I distress 
myself more vehemently than before by doing penance, if I weep 
more copiously, if I live better, if I help the poor more abundantly, 
if I am aflame more ardently with charity ; who of you would be so 



1 Lib. de vera et falsa poenitentia, c. 5. n. ii; C. Adhuc instant (32.), ibid. 
See Rom. 12, 3. 

2 Ep. 153. (alias 54.) ad Macedonium, c. 3. n. 7; C. In tantum (33.), ibid. 
See Matt. 5, 45. 



158 APPENDIX 

foolish as to say to this man : These things will profit you nothing 
in the future? Go, at least enjoy the pleasantness of this life. May 
God avert such monstrous and sacrilegious madness." Also John 
Chrysostom^, on the restoration of the fallen: "Such, believe me, 
such is the pity of God towards men : never does he spurn penance, 
if it be offered him sincerely and in simplicity; even if a man reach 
the extreme of wickedness, and wishes then to return to the life of 
virtue ; he receives him freely and embraces him, and does everything 
until he brings him back to his former state. And what is still more 
excellent and more extraordinary, even if one is not able to perform 
the whole order of rendering satisfaction, he does not reject a pen- 
ance, however small and done in however short a time; he accepts 
even that, nor does he suffer the reward of conversion, however 
humble, to be lost." This same view may also be supported by ex- 
amples. For David,2 by penance, obtained pardon at the same time 
for adultery and murder ; and yet afterwards he sinned grievously in 
the numbering of the people, as was shown by the multitude of the 
people destroyed. "But this is admirable, that he offered him- 
self to the angel who smote the people saying, 'Let thy hand be 
turned upon me, and upon my father's house.' When he had done 
this, he was immediately judged worthy of sacrifice, though he had 
been judged unworthy of absolution. Nor is it strange if by so great 
an oblation of himself, for the people, he obtained pardon of sin 
for himself; since Moses by offering himself for the error of the 
people, removed their sins." ^ 

From these and from many other testimonies it is clearly shown, 
that by penance not only once, but often, we rise from our sins, and 
that true penance may be done repeatedly. "For if we sin wilfully," 
as says the Apostle,^ "there is now left no sacrifice for sins," that 
is, because once only must Christ have to suffer; nor is a second 
baptism left ; but there is left a second penance, and a third, and after 
that another, as John Chrysostom^ says on this passage: "It must 



1 Lib. I. Ad Theodorum lapsum adhoratio n. 6; C. Talis mihi (28.), ibid. 
2 II. Kings 12, 13. 

* Ambrose, de Apologia David, c. 7. n. 38; C. Illud vero (26.), ibid. See 
II. Ki. 24, 17; I. Paralip. 21, 17. 

* Heb. 10, 26. 

5 Homil. 20. n. I. 



DISTINCTION XIV 159 

be known," he says, *'that some arise at this point doing away with 
penance on the pretext of these words ; just as if by penance a sinner 
after a fall could not rise a second time, and a third, and after that. 
But indeed in this passage the apostle does not exclude penance nor 
propitiation, which is often accomplished by penance; but a second 
baptism, and a (second) sacrifice." 



Distinction XV 

PART I 

I. That a man snared in many sins cannot do penance truly for one, 
unless he do penance for all. 

And just as by the aforesaid authorities is proven, the error of 
those who think that penance cannot be done often, and deny that 
sinners rise frequently by it from their falls ; so on the same author- 
ities is overcome the opposition of those who assert that a man 
ensnared in many sins, may repent truly of one, and may obtain 
the pardon of the same from the Lord without penance for another. 
Which opinion they also try to strengthen by authorities. For the 
Prophet says^ : "God will not judge twice for the same thing," or, 
as others have translated: "There shall not rise double affliction." 
If therefore, they say, anyone confesses to a priest one of two or 
more sins, and completes the penance for it enjoined on him by the 
priest as satisfaction, having kept silent about the other sins, he 
should not be judged again for the sin, for which he has made satis- 
faction according to the judgment of the priest, who bears Christ's 
power in the Church. For if he were judged again for it, the Lord 
would judge twice for the same thing and there would arise double 
affliction. — But "this ought only to be understood of those persons 
who are changed for the better by present punishment, and thus 
persevere, over whom there shall not rise double affliction. But those 
who are made harsher and meaner by lashes, like Pharaoh,^ add 
eternal pains to the present ones, so that temporal punishment is 
for them the beginning of eternal punishment. Wherefore Augus- 
tine : 'The fire is kindled,' etc., — that is : the vengeance shall begin 
here — 'and will burn unto utter condemnation.' This must be 
noted in opposition to the persons who say, that 'God will not judge 
twice for the same thing' applies to all chastisement, namely that 



iNahum i, 9. 

2 Exod. c. 7. f. — This whole passage taken from Gratian, C. Sunt plures 
(42.), de Poenitentia dist. 3 §1, and C. Ignis succensus est (43.), ibid. See Deut. 
32, 22. See Gregory, (instead of Augustine), XVIII. Moral, c. 22, n. 35. 

160 



DISTINCTION XV i6i 

some are corrected by chastisement here, others are punished here 
and forever." 

II. For what reasons chastisement befalls us. 

For chastisement befalls us in five ways : either that the merits 
of the just may be increased by patience, like Job ; or for the preser- 
vation of virtues, lest pride should tempt us, like Paul; or for the 
correcting of sins, like Mary's leprosy, or for the glory of God, like 
the man born blind ; or for the beginning of punishment, like Herod, 
that here may be seen what happens in hell, according to this say- 
ing^ : ''Consume them with double contrition, oh Lord." ''Therefore 
the authority of Nahum does not compel us to believe that all those 
evils which are temporally punished are not to be punished later by 
God." 

III. Of the Egyptians and Sodomites, zvho are said to have been 

punished temporally, lest they perish forever. 

For although in his comment on this passage Jerome says that 
the Egyptians and Israelites were punished temporally by God, that 
they might not be punished forever, yet his words are not to be 
taken generally of all. For he says^ : "Because he punished the 
human race in the flood, the Sodomites by fire, the Egyptians in the 
sea, and the Israelites in the desert, understand that he punished them 
temporally for their sins so as not to punish them forever," because 
God will not judge twice for the same thing. Those therefore who 
have been punished, will not be punished afterward ; otherwise the 
Scripture deceives us, to say which is a sin. 

Attend, reader, to these words, and beware lest you understand 
them generally of everyone, "and not only of those who did penance 
under the scourge, believing on the God of the Hebrews; which 
penance although brief and for the moment, God does not despise." ^ 
But that those who are not corrected by temporal chastisement, are 



1 Jer. 17, 18. Above, see Job i, 12 f.; II. Cor. 12, 7; Num. 12, 10; John 
9, 3; Acts 12, 23. Passage from Bede, on Matt. 9, 4. 

2 Loc. cit. in Nahum; cf. Gen. 7, 41; 19, 24; Exod. 14, 28; Num. 11, 33. 
Here almost the whole chapter and the last proposition of the preceding are 
taken from Gratian, cit. C, Sunt plures. 

3 C. Sunt plures (42.), de Poen. dist. 3. §1. 



i62 APPENDIX 

punished afterwards eternally, Jerome shows in the same passage 
where he treats of a believer taken in adultery, who was beheaded; 
and where he shows that trivial sins are purged by brief and tem- 
poral punishment, but great ones are reserved for long and eternal 
punishment, as he says^ : "Should anyone ask here, if the believer 
taken in adultery is beheaded, what becomes of him afterwards? 
For either he will be punished, and the saying is false : *God will not 
judge twice for the same thing'; or he will not be punished, and 
adulterers ought to choose to be punished here with brief penalty, 
that they may escape eternal tortures. To this we reply, that God 
knows the measure of punishments as of all things ; and that he is 
not prevented by the sentence of the judge, nor does he lose the 
power of inflicting punishment afterwards on the sinner ; and a great 
sin is atoned for by great and lasting tortures ; but that if a man is 
punished temporally, as he who cursed the Israelite, and he who 
gathered fire-wood on the sabbath, such are not punished afterwards, 
because a light offence is compensated for by present punishment. 
For a light offence is compensated for by light punishment." — By 
these words Jerome has intimated clearly enough that grievous sins 
both are punished here by heavy penalty, and in the future must be 
punished eternally, for which penance is not done during chastise- 
ment; but trivial ones which are here punished, receive atonement 
ty light punishment. This we do not doubt is true in the case of the 
^ood, and in the case of the evil perhaps it is also true. — Now it is 
evident enough that what they quoted from the prophecy does not 
support them who say that a man who keeps a crime to himself 
may win pardon for another sin by penance. 

PART II 

Also they cite other authorities. For Gregory says^ : " 'The 
Lord rains on one city, and does not rain on another' ; and the same 
city he floods in part, and in part leaves dry. When he who hates 
his neighbor, corrects himself of other sins, one and the same city 
is flooded in part, and in part remains dry; because there are per- 
sons who when they cut off some sins, become grievously hardened 



* Jerome, loc. cit. a little below; C. Quaerat hie aliquis (/|4.), ibid. 
2 Lib. I. in Ezech. hom. lo. n. 23; C. Pluit Dominus (40.), de Poenitentia 
d. 3. See Amos 4, 7. 



DISTINCTION XV 163 

in others." Also Ambrose^ : "The first consolation is, that God does 
not forget to show compassion" ; "the second relates to punishment, 
where even though faith is absent, the penalty satisfies and raises up 
again." — They also use reason, saying: "If he who has confessed one 
sin, and kept secret about another has fulfilled the satisfaction en- 
joined by the priest; do you suppose that if converted he should con- 
fess the secret sin, penance would be imposed on him for both? 
This seems far from reason, and from the custom of the Church, 
which imposes penance on no one twice for the same sin, unless^ re- 
peated. Therefore the satisfaction was sufficient for the sin, and 
therefore also it seems the sin was forgiven." 

To these we can answer as follows : The saying of Gregory : 
^*The Lord rained," etc., must refer not to the pardon of the offence, 
but to the abandonment of sin^ ; as part of the city is said to be 
flooded, in the sense that the man now ceases from the act and de- 
light of sin, to which before time he was a slave, not in the sense 
that he has his pardon. And the rain is called continence, by which 
he is recalled from the work of sin, because it is instilled in his heart 
from the fount of the grace of God, so that either thus little by little 
he may come to penance, or may be less punished by God, when 
otherwise he would have stored up torment for himself from lasting 
delight in and doing of sin. But if the rain be referred to pardon 
of guilt, it will seem to be contrary to the saying of the Gospel.'* 
For if on account of lack of pity, when a man has not pitied his 
neighbor, even those sins which have been remitted are repeated for 
punishment, much more those sins which have not yet been remitted 
are evidently reserved for punishment on account of his hatred for 
his brothers. And if he "who is appointed master of his own will, 
is not able to begin a new life, as Augustine^ says, unless he repents 
of his former Hfe ; how shall he come to the newness of pardon who 



^ In Ps. 118, sermo i8. n. 3; see Ps. 76, 10. Following passage ibid. n. 2; 
C. Prima consolatio (41.), ibid. 

2 The reason given by the defenders of this error, that is the custom of the 
Church, is not correct. 

3 The whole of the following interpretation is taken almost literally from 
Gratian, C. Quaerat hie aliguis (44.), ibid. 

4 See Matt. 18, 32. 

^ Sermo 351. (aUas hom. 50.) c. 2. n. 2. In the following, see Ps. 18, 13; 
Rom. 14, 23; I. Cor. 4, 4. 



i64 APPENDIX 

has not put aside the old robe of hate?" — Also the saying of Am- 
brose: ''Even if faith is absent, the penalty satisfies," etc., is not 
meant of the faith with which we believe on God, but of the con- 
sciousness of sin. For faith is absent, when the sense of sin is not 
present. For since no one knows all his sins, there is sometimes in a 
man sin of which he is not conscious. Wherefore the Apostle: "I 
am not conscious to myself of anything, yet am I not hereby justi- 
fied." When therefore someone is scourged for a sin of which he is 
not conscious, if he bears patiently the punishment, and humbly 
embraces it, thinking that by chance he has committed a sin, which 
he does not know, and for that he is being punished by God, the 
punishment satisfies, and raises up again the one afilicted. But as 
to the objection which is made concerning this satisfaction: "if it 
was not a satisfaction, it must be again imposed; but if it is not to 
be imposed again, it was a satisfaction : and if it was a satisfaction, 
it has obtained pardon" ; we can answer likewise that there was no 
satisfaction,^ because the man did not bring forth fruits worthy of 
penance. "For the satisfaction of penance," as Augustine^ says, "is 
to remove the causes of sin, nor afford an approach to their sug- 
gestions." Also^ : "Assuredly those who live wickedly and do not 
care to correct their life and ways, and yet amid their evil deeds do 
not cease to give alms frequently, deceive themselves in vain, on the 
ground that the Lord says: 'Give alms, and behold all things are 
clean unto you.' For they do not know how widely this reaches." 
"For there are many kinds of alms, which benefit us, when we give 
them. Not only does he give alms who gives food to a hungry man, 
drink to a thirsty, and the like ; but also he who gives pardon to one 
seeking it, gives alms, and he to whom power is given, who corrects 
with the lash, or restrains by some discipline, or prays that sin may 
be remitted unto a man, gives alms, because he excels in pity." 

IV. Of the kinds of alms. 

"For many good things are bestowed upon the unwilling, when 



1 See Matt. 3, 8. 

2 (Gennadius) de Ecclesiast. Dogmatibus, c. 24; C. Satisf actio poenitentiae 
(3.), ibid. 

3 Augustine, Enchiridion, c. 75. n. 20. See Luke 11, 41. Following passage,, 
ibid. c. 72. n. 19. See Matt. 25, 37 fiF. 



DISTINCTION XV 165 

their profit is considered, and not their will." ^ "But this is greater 
when from the heart we forgive the sin that someone has com- 
mitted against us. For it is not so much to be well-wishing to him 
who has done you no evil. This is much grander that you love even 
your enemy, and that you always wish him well, and do what you 
can for him who has wished you evil, and, if possible, has done it." 
'Therefore when the Lord says: 'Give alms, and all things are clean 
unto you' ; we are to understand that to those not believing on Christ, 
all things are clean, if they have given alms." "For whoever wishes 
to give alms methodically, ought to begin with himself, and first 
give them to himself." 

V. What alms are. 

"For alms are a work of mercy, as is most truly said, 'Have pity 
on thy own soul, pleasing God.' " ^ "They do not therefore deceive 
themselves, who think that by abundant alms of their fruits or of 
their riches, they buy themselves impunity, and continue in their 
sins, which they so love, that they desire to remain in them. 'But 
he who loves iniquity, hateth his own soul,' and whoever hates his 
own soul, is not merciful to it, but cruel. Certainly by loving it 
according to the world, he hates it according to God. If therefore 
he wishes to give it alms, through which it may be made clean, let 
him hate it according to the world, and love it according to God." 
By the alms, which a man owes first of all to himself, the inner man 
is cleansed. Christ exhorts us to this and says : "Make clean the 
things that are within. For nothing is clean to the unclean"; but 
"their mind and conscience are polluted," as the Apostle says. But 
all are unclean, whom faith does not cleanse, by which we believe 
on Christ; of this it is written: "Cleansing their hearts by faith." 
"But lest it seem that Christ rejects the alms which are offered of 
the fruits of the earth; 'those,' he says, 'ought to have been done,' 
that is judgment and love of God, 'and the others not omitted,' that 
is, alms of earthly fruits." ^ 

* August., ibid.; following passage ibid. c. 73. n. 19. (Cf. III. Sent. d. XXX. 
of the Lombard); third, ibid. c. 75. n. 20; foiirth, ibid. c. 76. n. 20. 

2 Ibid. ; following passage ibid. 77. n. 20; in the first, see Ecclus. 30, 24; in the 
second, Ps. 10, 6. — Also what follows, for the opinion, is ibid. c. 76. n. 20. See 
Matt. 23, 26, and Tit. i, 15; next Acts 15, 9. 

' Ibid. c. 76. n. 20. See Luke 11, 42. 



i66 APPENDIX 

VI . Whether those who remain in mortal sin and yet give large 
alms, should he said to make satisfaction. 

From these testimonies we are allowed to know that those per- 
sons who remain in mortal sin, even if they give large alms, do not 
make satisfaction by these, because they do them out of order, since 
they do not begin with themselves. Nor is such work properly 
called alms-giving, while they are cruel to themselves, and not pleas- 
ing to God. Therefore that must not be called satisfaction for sin, 
which a man does for one sin, while he persists in another ; because 
"to fast and pray and do other good works is of no avail, unless the 
mind is recalled from sin" ^ : and if at length the man is converted 
and confesses the secret sin to a priest, satisfaction must be imposed 
on him for both, because he has not made satisfaction worthily for 
the first. 

However some think that there was satisfaction, but unfruitful, 
while the man persisted in another sin; however its fruit was re- 
ceived, and he will begin to derive advantage, when he has done pen- 
ance for the other sin. For then both sins will be forgiven and the 
preceding satisfaction will be made alive, which was dead; just as 
the Baptism of a man who assented insincerely to it is of value for 
the first time when pretence leaves his mind through penance. And 
they cite authorities in defence of this opinion. For Augustine 
says^ : "It is pious to believe, and our faith demands, that, when the 
grace of Christ in a man has destroyed his former evil, it should 
also reward the good; and when it has destroyed what it found 
was not its own, it should love the good which it has planted in the 
sinner." Also Jerome^ : "If you ever see a man do some just works 
among many sins; God is not so unjust as to forget the good deeds 
on account of the evil; but he will have these which he has planted 
in good soil reaped and gathered into barns." — But we understand 
these sayings of him who sometimes does good things in charity, 
and is good, but at some other time is evil and commits many sins. 
We are not thereby to understand that he has done just works among 
many sins, as if at one and the same time he committed sins and 



^ Can. Nihil prodest (21.), ibid. — Interpretation below almost word for word 
from Gratian, C. Quaerat hie aliguis (44.), ibid. 

2 De vera et falsa Poenitentia (Pseudo- Augustine), c. 14. n. 29. 

3 Comment, in Aggaeum I, 6. 



DISTINCTION XV 167 

just works, but that at different times he has done both. For unless 
he was good when he did good things, it would not be said that the 
seed was planted in good soil. Therefore when the offences com- 
mitted after good works have been wiped out, the earlier good works 
which were done in charity, and which the offences following have 
killed, will come to life and be rewarded when penance has been done 
for those offences. Wherefore the Apostle^ : "Laying again the 
foundation of penance from dead works" ; when he speaks of dead 
works, signifies former good works, which were dead through sub- 
sequent sin, because these persons made their earlier good works 
of no effect by sinning. Just as these good works become of no effect 
by sin, so they are revived by penance, and begin to be of value for 
the winning of eternity. Likewise God loves the good, which he has 
planted in the sinner, in him, that is, who has sinned after his good 
deed; he does not continue to sin and do good at the same time; 
because God would not love the work of such a man to reward it. 

VII. Whether good works, which are done by evil men, avail for 
the winning of life, when the doers are converted to good. 

Moreover this view may be accepted of the good works which 
are done by a man while he is evil, and persists in mortal sin either 
for a time, or to the end ; which works are said to be rewarded by 
God and not given over to oblivion, not that they secure life eternal, 
but help towards a more endurable punishment in judgment; as 
Augustine says of faith and other virtues which are possessed with- 
out charity^ : "If anyone has not the charity which comes from the 
unity of the spirit and the bond of peace, by which the Church is 
joined together, but belongs to some schism, and rather than deny 
Christ, suffers tribulations, hunger, persecution, or fire, or beasts, or 
even the cross, in fear of hell; his conduct is not to be blamed in 
any way, but on the contrary his patience is to be praised. For we 
cannot say that it would have been better for him by denying Christ, 
to suffer none of these pains which he has suffered by confessing 



1 Heb. 6, I. — This whole explanation from Gratian, C. Inter mittentes (i9.)» 
de Poenitentia d. 4. 

2 Lib. de Patientia, c. 26. n. 23; C. Si quis autem (49.)i ibid. d. 3. See Eph. 
4, 3. and below I. Cor. 13, 3. 



i68 APPENDIX 

him; but we ought to think that the future judgment may perhaps 
be more tolerable for him, than if by denying Christ, he had suffered 
no pains as the saying of the Apostle: *If I give my body to be 
burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing' ; is understood 
to mean that it profits nothing for attaining the kingdom, only for 
receiving a more tolerable punishment at the last judgment." And 
below^ : "This is said for the sake of charity, without which there 
cannot be any true penance^ in us ; because in good men there is the 
charity of God which endures all things." 

From these statements it is clear that good works which are 
done without charity profit at least for securing a more tolerable 
punishment, but not for obtaining life. For Ezekiel^ says that those 
deeds which a man does in charity, if he falls afterwards and does 
not rise, are not in the memory of God : "If the just man shall turn 
away from his justice and shall recommit iniquity, shall he live? 
All his justices which he has done, shall not be remembered; he 
shall die in his sin ; and the righteousness which he did shall not be 
had in remembrance." In his exposition of this passage, Gregory 
says : "These words are to be especially considered by us, because 
when we commit evil deeds, we recall to memory without cause the 
good deeds we have accomplished, whereas during the perpetration 
of evil deeds there ought to be no confidence reposed in past good 
deeds." — This saying must be interpreted that past good deeds do 
not give us assurance of receiving life, even if they do of milder 
punishment; otherwise it would oppose the preceding authoritative 
statement of Augustine. And therefore good deeds done without 
charity, and good deeds done in charity, but attended by mortal 
guilt, which subsequent penance does not blot out, serve to win a 
milder punishment, not the fruit of life. 

I think a sufficient reply has been made to those who assert that 
penance may be done and pardon given for one offence, when an- 
other is still delighted in or not revealed by confession; they are 
confuted not only by previously cited authorities, but also by those 



^ Ibid. c. 23. n. 20, and can. cit. §1. In Augustine, the word is patientia, not 
poenitentia. 

2 Poenitentia. 

3 Ezek. 3, 20, cf. 33, 13; the exposition of Gregory is I. super Ezech. homil. 
II. n. 21; C. Si averterit (15.) and C. Hoc nobis (16.), ibid. d. 4. 



DISTINCTION XV 169 

quoted below. For Augustine says^ : ''There are many who repent 
of their sin, but still reserve for themselves some sins in which they 
delight; not understanding that the Lord freed the dumb and deaf 
man once for all from his demon, teaching by this that we are never 
healed, unless of everything. For if he wished sins to be retained in 
part by the woman who had seven devils, he could have benefited 
him by casting out six and letting one remain. But he expelled seven, 
so as to teach that all offences should be cast out at once. Indeed 
when he cast out a legion of demons from another, he left not 
one of them all, to possess the freed man showing that even if 
our sins are a thousand, it is necessary to repent of them all. 
The Lord never healed anyone, whom he did not release wholly. 
For he healed the whole man on the Sabbath, because he freed 
both the body from all infirmity and the soul from all contagion; 
indicating that the penitent ought to grieve for all his sins at 
once. For I know that the Lord is an enemy to every wicked 
man. How therefore shall a man who reserves one sin, receive 
pardon for another? Without the love of God he would get 
pardon, but without it no one ever finds grace. For he is an enemy 
of God, while he perseveres in offending. For it is a sort of impiety 
and infidelity, to expect a half pardon from him who is just and 
justice itself; since then he would find grace without true penance. 
For true penance tends to lead the man who confesses to the purity 
of baptism. Since, if he is rightly penitent, any uncleanness he has 
contracted after the purification of baptism he must wash away at 
least with the tears of his mind ; but he is hard enough whose eyes do 
not declare the grief of his heart. But let him know himself culp- 
ably hard, who weeps over the injuries of time, or the death of a 
friend, and does not show his grief for sin in tears. Who therefore 
repents, let him repent wholly," The same^ : "Penitents, if truly you 
are penitents, and not mockers, change your life, be reconciled to 
God ! You do penance, you bow your knees, and laugh : you mock 
the patience of God. If you do penance, repent; if you do not 
repent you are not penitent. If then you repent, why do you do the 



^ De vera et falsa Poenitentia (among Augustine's works), c. 9. n. 24; C. 
Sunt plures (42.), de Poenitentia d. 3. §1. See Mark 7, 32; Lk. 8, 30; Mark 5, 9; 
John 7, 23. 

^Sermo 393. (alias 41 in the 50 Homil.) n. i; C. Poenitentes (10.), ibid. 



I70 APPENDIX 

things you have wrongly done? If you repent of having done them, 
refuse to do them; if you still do them, certainly you are not peni- 
tent." Also Innocent IF : '*We admonish our brothers, lest they 
suffer the souls of the laity to be deceived by false penances, and to 
be dragged into hell. And it is known to be false penance, when 
many sins are overlooked and penance is done for one alone ; or when 
penance is done for one, and another is not abandoned." 

From the foregoing is gained a clear knowledge of true penance 
or satisfaction. For this is true penance which abolishes sin; and 
this alone does it, which corrects the wrong; and this corrects the 
wrong which causes hatred of the offence committed and of com- 
mitting it, together with desire to make satisfaction. For Judas is 
said to have done penance, without gaining pardon, because by such 
penance he did not correct the offence. Wherefore Jerome^ : "His 
late penance did not profit Judas anything for by it he could not 
correct the crime as when a brother sins against a brother, so that he 
can amend his sin, it can be forgiven him ; but if his work remains, 
penance is expressed by word in vain ; this it is which is said of that 
most unhappy man : 'And may his prayer be turned into sin' ; so that 
not only was he unable to amend the sin of treachery, but he added 
the crime of slaying himself." — Take care how you understand this 
phrase: "That he can amend his sin," etc. For amendment is not 
to be understood here as a recompense for something taken, but as 
remorse and abomination for sin, with desire of satisfaction. For if 
a man takes away unjustly from another what he cannot restore, as 
an eye, or life or the like, and yet if he does penance for the sin, with 
longing for worthy satisfaction, he has pardon. Nor should anyone 
therefore think that he who has unjustly taken away another's goods 
which he can return, does penance for his sin and obtains pardon, 
unless he restores what he took away. "For as long as the object 
for whose sake the sin was committed is not returned, if it can be 
returned, penance is not done, but feigned." ^ 



* Can. Fratres nostros (8.), de Poenitentia d. 5. 

2 Lib. IV. Comment, in Matt. (27, 5.); C. Nihil Judae (38.), de Poenitentia 
d. 3. See Ps. 108, 7. 

' August., Ep. 153. (alias 54.) ad Macedonium, c. 6. n. 20; C. Si res aliena 
I ), C. 14. q. 6. 



Distinction XVI 

PART I 

I. Of the three things which must he considered in penance, that is, 

compunction, confession, satisfaction. 

Moreover in the perfection of penance three steps are to be 
observed, that is compunction of the heart, confession of the mouth, 
satisfaction in deed. Wherefore John the golden-mouthed^ : ''Per- 
fect penance compels the sinner to bear all things cheerfully ; in his 
heart contrition, in his mouth, confession, in deed all humihty. This 
is fruitful penance; that just as we offend God in three ways, that 
is, with the heart, the mouth, and the deed, so in three ways we 
make satisfaction." For there are three different sins, as Augustine 
says,2 "of the heart, and of deed, and of habit or word, as it were 
three deaths : one as if in the home ; that is, when there is consent to 
lust in the heart; another as if carried next outside the door, when 
assent proceeds to deed ; the third when the soul is oppressed by force 
of evil habit as by a weight, or armed with the shield of guilty 
defence, as if already decaying in the grave. These are the three 
kinds of dead men whom the Lord is said to have raised." To this 
triple death is supplied a triple remedy : contrition, confession, satis- 
faction. Compunction is commended to us here^ : "Rend your 
hearts, and not your garments," confession here : "The just man is 
first accuser of himself" ; for truly he confesses who accuses himself, 
who imputes evil to himself by execration. And here: "Pour out 
your hearts in his presence." And again: "Confess your sins one 
to another." 

II. What true satisfaction is. 

Satisfaction is commanded by John*, where he says, "Bring 

1 ("Chrysostom.") Can. Perfecta poenitentia (8.), de Poenitentia dist. 3. 

2 Lib. I. de Serm. Domini in monte, c. 12. n. 37, and C. Sicut trihus (21.), 
ibid. dist. 2. See Matt. 9, 25; Luke 7, 14; John 11, 43. 

3 Joel 2, 13; following passage is Prov. 18, 17; third, Ps. 61, 9; fourth, James 
5, 16. 

* Matt. 3, 8; Luke 3, 8. — Following passage is in the Glossa on this passage, 
cf. Gregory, I. Homil. in Evang., homil. 20. n. 8. 

171 



172 APPENDIX 

forth fruits worthy of penance," that is, that according to the quality 
and quantity of the guilt should be the quality and quantity of the 
punishment. "For the fruit of good work ought not be the same 
for him who has sinned not at all, or to a slight degree, and for him 
who has fallen grievously." — Therefore discretion for the penitent 
is very necessary, that he may do what Augustine teaches, saying^ : 
**Let a man consider the quality of his offence, in place, in time, in 
persistence, or in change of the person, and under how much temp- 
tation he has done it, and how repeatedly he has committed the sin 
itself. For it is necessary that a fornicator repent according to the 
excellence of his position or of his office, and according to the kind 
of prostitute, and according to the manner of his deed ; and the way 
in which he committed his baseness : whether in a sacred place, or in 
a time appointed for prayer, as there are festivities and times of fast- 
ing. Let him consider how long he has persisted, and let him weep 
because he has sinned persistently, and let him remember by how 
strong an attack he was conquered — for there are those who not 
only are not conquered, but of their own accord offer themselves to 
sin nor do they await temptation, but go to seek the pleasure. — ^And 
let him ponder within himself how he sinned with delight in the 
repeated doing of sin. All these various things are to be confessed 
and wept over, so that when the man has recognized what his sin is, 
he may soon find God propitious to him. In estimating the enormity 
of his sin, let him consider of what age he was, of what wisdom and 
rank. Let him dwell upon these details, and let him realize the nature 
of his offence, purging away with his tears the whole quality of his 
wrong-doing; let him weep over the virtue which in the meanwhile 
he has lacked. For he must grieve not only that he has sinned, but 
that he has deprived himself of virtue. Let him weep also since 
"offending in one, he is made guilty of all." ^ For he has shown him- 
self unthankful, who full of virtue has not honored God at all. For 
a man becomes the more guilty sinner in just so far as he is the 
more acceptable to God; for this reason Adam sinned the more 
because he abounded in every good thing. In another way the 



1 (Among his works) de vera et falsa Poenitentia c. 14. n. 29; C. Consideret 
(i.), ibid. d. 5. 

2 James 2, 10. Following passage from Lib. de Vera et falsa Poen. c. 15. 
n. 30. 31, and can. cit. 



DISTINCTION XVI 173 

offender in one point becomes guilty of all, because every virtue 
suffers detriment from one offence. "Let him put himself w^hoUy 
in the judgment and power of the priest, reserving nothing of his 
own to himself, so that he may be ready to do everything at the 
priest's order to secure the life of the soul, which he would do to- 
shun the death of the body ; and this with desire, because he is regain- 
ing eternal life. For he who will be immortal ought to do with hap- 
piness what one on the point of death would do to postpone death : 
always let him pray to God, let him offer God his mind and the con- 
trition of his heart, and next let him give what he is able of his. 
possessions; and then whatever he offers, he offers it without fear.. 
The Lord had respect to Abel, and to his gifts' ^ ; it says 'to Abel' 
before 'to his gifts.' Therefore with judgment of the heart are the 
alms of the giver to be weighed ; nor should we consider how much,, 
but with what intention, with what affection he gives what he is able- 
He therefore who wishes to redeem his sins by an oblation of tem- 
poral goods, let him first offer his heart. Let him take care also lest 
he be led by a natural feeling of shame, and divide up his confes- 
sion in his own mind, so that he chooses to reveal different things to 
different priests. For some conceal from one priest what they keep 
to reveal to another ; but this is to praise themselves, and to tend to 
hypocrisy and always to be in want of the pardon, to which they 
think they may attain by bits. Let him beware also lest he come to 
the Lord's body before he is comforted with a good conscience ; and 
let him grieve, because he does not yet dare to receive the food of 
salvation, which he much desires. Also let him abstain from games,, 
from the spectacles of the world, who wishes to attain the perfect 
grace of remission. These are worthy fruits of penance, unbinding 
the captive soul, and preserving it in liberty.'* And further^ : "Let 
the soul seek worthy fruits, even if not worthy of penance. For 
there are worthy fruits of virtues which do not suffice for penitents. 
For penance demands harder ones, that with grief and groans, it may 
obtain life for the dead." — From these passages we are shown what 
are the fruits worthy of penance, by which true satisfaction is pro- 
cured, also that not all worthy fruits are fruits worthy of penance ; 
which last is to be understood of that penance, which belongs ta 



* Gen. 4, 4. 
2 Loc. cit. 



174 APPENDIX 

greater offences. For what suffices for men who sin not at all or 
little, does not suffice for the grievously delinquent. 

III. What false satisfaction is. 

And just as there are fruits worthy of penance, and true satis- 
faction, so also there are unworthy fruits, and false satisfaction, that 
is, false penance. Wherefore Gregory^ : "We speak of false pen- 
ances, which are not imposed according to the instructions of the 
saints in keeping with the quality of the offences. Therefore a sol- 
dier, or a money-lender, or a man assigned to some office, which he 
cannot fill without sin, if snared in grievous faults he comes to pen- 
ance, or a man who holds the goods of another unjustly, or who bears 
hate in his heart, let him recognize that he cannot accomplish true 
penance, unless he relinquishes his business, or abandons his office, 
and drives hate out of his heart, and restores the goods which he has 
unjustly taken away. Yet let him not despair ; in the meanwhile we 
urge him to do anything good he can do, so that God may illuminate 
his heart unto penance." Whereas there is inner and outer penance, 
it appears sufficiently from what has already been said, what is true 
and what is false for both of them. 

PART II 

IV. Of the three acts of penance. 

But to the foregoing we must add that penance is done in three 
ways : namely, before baptism, for previous sins ; after baptism, for 
more grievous sins which are committed later; also there is daily 
penance for venial sins, which is the practice of humble men and 
perfect. Wherefore Augustine^ : "There are three acts of penance, 
which your learning recognizes with me. There is one which pro- 
duces a new man, when all previous sins are washed away by bap- 
tism ; because no one who is master of his own will can begin a new 
life, unless he repents of his old life; from which rule children are 



1 Gregor. VII., Concil. Rom. V. n. 5; c. Falsas poenitentias (6.), ibid. d. 5. 

2 Sermo 351. (alias 50. inter 50 Homil.) c. 2. n. 2; C. Tres sunt (81.), ibid. 
d. I. Following passage, ibid. c. 4. n. 7, and in the same canon; third, August., 
Ep. 265. (alias 108.), ad Seleucianum, n. 7; C. Agunt homines (97.), de Consecrat. 
d. 4 . (See Acts 2. 38.) 



DISTINCTION XVI 175 

except when they are baptized, because they are not yet able to use 
free will, and for them the faith of those by whom they are offered 
is of value to the remission of original sin." "Another act of pen- 
ance is after baptism, and is performed for those sins, which the 
decalogue of the Law enumerates. Therefore men do penance before 
baptism, for earlier sins, so that they may also be baptized, as Peter 
says : *Do penance,' and 'let everyone of you be baptized in the name 
of the Lord,' etc. They also do penance, if after baptism they have 
so sinned, that they deserve to be excommunicated and afterwards 
reconciled." "There is also the penance which is the daily penalty 
of good and humble believers in which we beat our breasts, saying: 
'Forgive us our debts,' etc. Nor do we wish the debts forgiven us 
which we believe were forgiven us in baptism." ^ 

V. Of a multitude of venial sins, which oppress us like one great sin. 

"But those sins which creep on human frailty, small indeed, yet 
numerous, which if they were collected against us, would grieve and 
oppress us like some one great sin. For what difference does it make 
in a shipwreck whether the ship is swamped and overwhelmed by 
one great wave, or whether little by little the water steals into the 
hold through the fault of negligent seamen and fills the ship and 
it is sunk? Therefore let fasting and almsgiving and prayers keep 
watch for us, in which when we say : 'Forgive us our debts,' etc., we 
show that we have what is to be forgiven us; and let us humiliate 
our souls by these words, and not cease to do penance daily." 

VI. Of the satisfaction for venial sins. 

What moreover is sufficient satisfaction for venial sins, Augus- 
tine indicates, saying in the Enchiridion^ : "For daily and brief and 
trivial sins, without which we do not live, the daily prayer of the 
faithful makes satisfaction. For it is theirs to say : 'Our Father who 
art in heaven,' etc. This prayer wholly wipes out small and daily 
sins; and it effaces those faults, by which the life of the faithful is 
made wicked, so by doing penance it becomes transformed into a 
better. Thus we truly say: 'Forgive us our debts,' so also may we 



1 Ibid. n. 8; C. Tres sunt, supra cit., which extends into the following chapter, 
the proposition being interrupted by the chapter divisions. 

2 Cap. yi. n. ig; C. De quotidianis (20.), de Poen. 



176 APPENDIX 

truly say : 'as also we forgive our debtors/ that is, be it done, as we 
have said ; because almsgiving itself for those who seek pardon is to 
forgive wholly." — From these and other passages quoted it is now 
easy to understand what satisfaction is to be made for venial sins. 
For the Lord's prayer with fasting and alms suffices, on condition 
however that some little contrition precedes and that confession be 
made also if opportunity offer; of this confession we shall treat 
later.^ But for more grievous sins these means are also to be used 
in making satisfaction, but much more vehemently and strictly, be- 
cause, as Augustine says,^ to do penance "it is not sufficient to change 
the character into a better, and to depart from evils done, unless for 
the wrongs which have been done, the man satisfies the Lord by the 
grief of penance, the groan of humility, the sacrifice of a contrite 
heart, with the aid of alms." 



» Dist. XVII. 

2 Sermo. 351 (alias 50 inter 50 homil.) c. 5. n. 12. 



Distinction XVII 

PART I 

I. Whether sins are forgiven without confession. 

Here arises a question that has many parts. For first we are 
asked whether without satisfaction and confession of the mouth, by 
contrition of the heart only, sin may be forgiven anyone. Secondly, 
whether it suffices for anyone to confess to God without a priest. 
Thirdly, whether confession made to a faithful layman would be 
valid. — On these points even the learned are found to think differ- 
ently, because the doctors seem to have taught varied and almost 
contradictory views about them. For some say, that without con- 
fession of the mouth and satisfaction of deed no one is cleansed from 
sin. if he has time for doing these things. — But others say, that before 
confession of the mouth and satisfaction through the contrition of 
the heart sin is forgiven by God, if however the sinner has the desire 
to confess. Wherefore the Prophet^ : "I have said, I will confess 
against myself my injustice to the Lord, and thou hast remitted," 
etc. Which Cassiodorus^ explains saying: " *I have said,' that is, I 
have determined within myself, that *I would confess, and thou 
hast remitted it.' Great pity of God, who hast remitted the sin for 
the mere promise ! For the promise is accepted for the deed." Also 
Augustine^ : "Not yet does he make it known, but he promises that 
he will make it known; and the Lord remits it, because to say just 
this is to make something known in the heart. Not yet is the voice 
in the mouth, so that a man may hear the confession, and God hears." 
Also : "The sacrifice of God is a troubled spirit, a contrite heart," etc. 
Elsewhere also we read: "At whatever hour a sinner turns and 
laments, he shall Hve in life and shall not die"; it does not say: he 
confesses with his mouth, but "turns, laments." "Wherefore we are 



^ Ps. 31, 5. — On these two opinions, cf. Hugh, II. de Sacram. p. 14, c. 8, and 
Sum. Sent. tr. 6. c. 11 ; also Gratian, Introductio de Poenit. d. I. 

''Ps. 31, 7. 

3 In Ps. 31. enarrat. 2. n. 15, and C. Magna pietas (5.), de Poenit. d. i. — 
See Ps. 50, 19, and Ezek. 18, 17. 

177 



178 APPENDIX 

given to understand, that even though the mouth be silent, we may 
sometimes obtain pardon. Hence those lepers also whom the Lord 
commanded to show themselves to the priests, were cleansed on the 
way, before they reached the priests. By this it is indicated that 
before we open our mouths to the priests, that is confess our sins, we 
are cleansed from the leprosy of sin. Lazarus also was not first 
led out of the tomb and afterward awakened by the Lord, but was 
awakened within and came forth alive; that the awakening of the 
spirit might be shown to precede confession. For no one can confess, 
unless aroused, because confession by one dead, as by one who is 
not, does not exist : therefore no one confesses, unless aroused. But 
no one is aroused, except he who is absolved from sin ; because sin 
is the death of the soul, and as the soul is the life of the body, so 
its own life is God." ^ — From these and many other authorities it is 
proved that before confession or satisfaction sin is forgiven upon 
contrition alone; and those who deny it, find it hard to explain these 
authorities; and they introduce the testimony of other authors for 
the overthrow of this opinion and the support of their own. For the 
Lord says through Isaiah^ : "Tell thou thy iniquities that thou mayest 
be justified." Also Ambrose^: "No man can be justified from sin 
unless he has first confessed the sin itself." He also says* : "Con- 
fession frees the soul from death, confession opens paradise, con- 
fession gives the hope of salvation, because he does not deserve to 
be justified who is not willing to confess his sin in his life-time. 
Confession frees us, which is done with penance. But penance is the 
grief of the heart and the bitterness of the soul for the evils which 
each one has committed." Also John^: "No man can receive the 
grace of God unless he has been purified of all sin by the confession 
of penance and by baptism." Also Augustine^ : "Do penance, as it 
is done in the Church. Let no one say to himself: I do it secretly, 
because I do it before God; God knows, who has pardoned me. 



^Gratian, C. Convertimini ad me (34.), ibid.; see Luke 17, 14; John 11, 44; 
Ecclus. 17, 26. — On the life of the soul, cf. Augustine, in Ps. 70. enarrat. 2. n. 3. 

2 Is. 43, 26. 

3 De Paradiso, c. 14. n. 71; C. Non potest (38.), ibid. 

^ Serm. 25. de s. Quadragesima, n. i; C. Ecce nunc tempus (39.), ibid. 
5 (Chromatius?) C. Non potest quis (41.). ibid. 

* Serm. 392. (alias homil. 49. inter Homil. 50) c. 3. n. 3; C. Agite poenitentiam 
(44.), ibid. See Matt. 18, 18; John 20, 23; Job 31, 33. 



DISTINCTION XVII 179 

Ijecause I do it in my heart. Then without cause was it said : 'What 
thou loosest on earth, shall be loosed in heaven'? Then without 
<:ause 'were the keys given' ? Then we make vain the word of Christ. 
Job says: 'If I have blushed to confess my sins in the sight of the 
people' !" Also Ambrose^ : "The guilt is venial, which is followed 
by confession of sins." Also Augustine^ on this passage of the 
psalm : "Let not the deep swallow me up, and let not the pit shut her 
mouth upon me," says : "The pit is the depth of iniquity into which 
if thou hast fallen, its mouth shall not close upon thee, if thou dost 
not close thy mouth. Confess therefore and say : 'Out of the depths 
have I cried unto thee, oh Lord,' etc., and thou shalt escape. It closes 
upon him, who has despised it in the depth, from whom in death, just 
as from one who is not, there can be no confession." Also^ : "No 
one receives pardon for a more grievous debt of penalty, unless he 
has paid some kind of penalty, even if much less than he owes. For 
so the liberality of mercy is granted us by God, that the justice of 
discipline be not neglected." Also Jerome* : "Let him who is a 
sinner, lament his own sins or those of the people, and let him enter 
the church, from which he had wandered on account of sin, and let 
him sleep in sackcloth, that he may compensate by austerity of life 
for the earlier pleasures by which he offended God." — By these and 
other authorities they endeavor to prove that without oral confession 
and some payment of penalty, no one can be cleansed from sin. 

What therefore is to be thought about these things ? What be- 
lieved ? It can certainly be said that without confession of the mouth 
and payment of the outward penalty sins are effaced by contrition and 
humility of heart. For f rorri the moment anyone proposes to confess, 
being pricked in conscience, God forgives ; because there is there the 
confession of the heart, though not of the mouth, by which the soul 
is cleansed within from the stain and contagion of committed sin, 
and the debt of eternal death is relaxed. Therefore that which was 
said above regarding confession and penance, should be referred 



^ Lib. de Paradise, c. 14. n. 71; C. Serpens (47.), ibid. 

^Enarrat. in Ps. 68, 16. serm. i. n. 19; Gratian, C. Voluissent iniqui (60.), 
ibid. §3. See Ps. 129, i; Prov. 18, 3; Ecclus. 17, 26. 

* De Continentia, c. 6. n. 15; C. Nullus debitae (42.), ibid. 

* Comment, in loel. i, 13; C. Qui sanctus (66.), ibid. For the last proposi- 
tion and following cf. Gratian, C. Quis aliquando (87.), ibid. §14. 



i8o APPENDIX 

either to the confession of the heart, or to inward punishment — just 
as this saying of Augustine, ''that no one obtains pardon, unless first 
he has paid some small penalty for his sin" — must be understood of 
the external penalty, and applied to the scornful or negligent, just 
as this : "Let no one say, I do it secretly," etc. For some neglect to 
confess sins in their lifetime or are ashamed to do it, and therefore 
do not deserve to be justified. For just as inward penance is enjoined 
upon us, so also confession of the mouth, and outward satisfaction, 
if we have the opportunity. Wherefore he is not truly penitent who 
does not have the desire to confess. And just as remission of sin is 
the gift of God, so penance and confession by which sin is wiped 
out, cannot take place save from God, as Augustine says^ : "Now, he 
says, he has the gift of the holy Spirit, who confesses and repents, 
because there cannot be confession of sin and compunction in man 
of himself. For when anyone is angry at himself and dissatisfied 
with himself, it is not without the gift of the holy Spirit." Therefore 
a penitent ought to confess his sins, if he have time ; and yet before 
confession of the mouth, if there is the promise in the heart, forgive- 
ness is extended to him. 

PART II 

II. Whether it suffices to confess to God alone. 

Now let us look into the second division of the question, that 
is, whether it suffices to confess sins to God alone, or whether it is 
necessary to confess to a priest. — To some it seems to suffice, if con- 
fession is made to God alone without the judgment of the priest and 
confession of the Church, because David said^ : "I said, I will confess 
to the Lord, and thou hast remitted," etc.; he does not say "to the 
priest," and yet he says the sin is forgiven him. Also Ambrose-^ : 
"Peter wept, because his guilt had come suddenly upon him; I do 
not find what he said, I find that he wept. I read of his tears, I do not 
read of his satisfaction. But what cannot be defended, can be 
washed away. Tears wash away a sin, which one is ashamed to 
confess with the voice. Weeping brings about both pardon and a 



* Enarrat. in Ps. 50. n. 16. 

*Ps. 31,5- 

3 X. Exposit. Evang. sec. Lucam, n. 88; C. Petrus doluit (i.), ibid. d. i. 



DISTINCTION XVII i8i 

natural feeling of shame." Bishop Maximus^ says the same also; 
hkewise John Chrysostom^: "I do not say to you that you should 
betray yourself in public, nor accuse yourself among others, but I 
wish that you would obey the Prophet when he says : 'Reveal thy life 
to God.' Before God therefore confess your sins, before a true judge 
with prayer, declare your guilt not with your tongue but in the mem- 
ory of your conscience; and then at last hope that you may obtain 
pity. If you have your sins continually in mind, you will never 
harbor evil against your neighbor in your heart." Also^ : "Tell your 
sins, that you may efface them. But if you are ashamed to tell them 
to anyone, tell them daily in your spirit ; I do not say, that you should 
confess to your fellow-servant, so that he might reproach you; tell 
them to God, who cures them. For even if you do not tell them to 
him, he is not ignorant of them: when you did them, he was pres- 
ent; when you committed them, he knew. Then why does he wish 
to learn them from you? You have not blushed to sin, and do you 
blush to confess? Tell them in this life, that in another you may 
have rest; tell them with groaning and weeping. Your sins are 
written in the book. Let the sponges of your sins be your tears." 
Likewise Prosper* : "If those, whose sins are concealed from human 
notice, not confessed by themselves, nor published by others, refuse 
to confess or amend them, they will have as avenger the God whom 
they have as witness. But if they become judges of themselves, and 
as it were avengers of their own iniquity, let them inflict on them- 
selves a voluntary penalty of the severest punishment; they will 
exchange eternal punishment for temporal penalties and with tears 
flowing from true contrition of heart they shall extinguish the burn- 
ings of eternal fire." And below^ : "They will more easily reconcile 
God to themselves, who either by their own confessions make known 
their offence or if others are ignorant, pronounce against themselves 
a sentence of voluntary excommunication and separated, not in spirit 
but in office, from the altar to which they have ministered, they 
mourn their life as dead ; certain that being reconciled to themselves 



1 Homil. 53. 

'Homil. 31. in Epist. ad Hebr. n. 3; cf. Gratian, C. Quis aliguando (87.), 
ibid. §1. See Ps. 36, 5. 

3 Homil. 2. in Ps. 50. n. 5. (among his spurious works.) 

* Lib. II. de Vita contemplat. c. 7. n. 2; C. Porro illi (31.), ibid. 

* Ibid. n. 3; C. Facilius (32.), ibid. 



i82 APPENDIX 

by the efficacious fruits of penance, they will receive from God not 
only what they have lost, but also the joys of the heavenly city." — On 
these authorities do they depend who maintain that it suffices to- 
confess one's sins to God without a priest. For they say that if any- 
one fears to disclose his guilt among men, lest he be held in oppro- 
brium therefor, or lest others might resort to sin by his example, 
and therefore is silent to man, and reveals everything to God; he 
will obtain pardon. 

III. That it does not suffice to confess to God alone, if time allows,, 
provided it is possible to confess to a man. 

But that it is necessary to confess to priests, is proved not only 
on the authority of James^ : "Confess your sins to one another," etc., 
but also by the testimonies of many others. For Augustine says^ : 
"Let a man of his own will judge himself while he is able, and let 
him change his ways to better, lest when he no longer is able, he be 
judged without his will by the Lord; and when he has pronounced 
upon himself a sentence of the severest but the most profitable 
medicine, let him come to the priests by whom the power of the keys 
of the Church is exercised. Just as one beginning to be a good son 
should observe the order of his mother's members, and accept the 
manner of his satisfaction from those placed in command of sacred 
things, offering the sacrifice of a contrite heart devoutly and humbly. 
Let him however do that which not only benefits him for salvation, 
but serves also for an example to others; so that if his sin is not 
only a grievous evil for him, but also a great stumbling-block for 
others, and it seems to the priest expedient for the Church, let him 
not refuse to do penance to the knowledge of many or of the whole 
people, lest through shame he inflame the deadly wound." "When^^ 
the wound of sin and the power of the disease are so great, that the 
medicaments of the body and blood of the Lord must be postponed 
according to the authority of the priest, each one ought to withdraw 
from the altar to do penance, and then to be reconciled by the same 



1 James 5, 16. 

* Sermo 351. (alias the last among the 50 Homil.) c. 4. n. 9; C. ludicet 
(85.), ibid. 

3 Augustine, Ep. 54. (alias 118. ad Januar.) c. 3. n. 4; C. In actione (84.)^ 
ibid. 



DISTINCTION XVII 183 

authority." Also Pope Leo^ : "The manifold love of God succors 
human beings who have fallen, so that they regain their hope of life 
not only by baptism, but also by penance, since the helps of the 
divine will have been so ordained, that sinners cannot obtain the 
indulgence of God save through the supplications of priests. For 
Christ gave this power to those set over the Church, that they might 
give the satisfaction of penance to those who confessed, and when 
they had been purged by saving satisfaction, they might admit them 
to the communion of the sacraments through the door of reconcilia- 
tion." Also Augustine^ : "Let him who repents, repent wholly, and 
let him show his grief with tears; let him present his life to God 
through the priest, let him anticipate the judgment of God by con- 
fession. For the Lord gave command to those who needed to be 
cleansed, that they show themselves to the priests, teaching thus 
that sins must be confessed by bodily presence, not set down in 
writing." For he said : Also all of you show yourselves ; not one for 
all, not one as a messenger of the others, to offer for you to God 
the gift appointed by Moses; but you who have sinned yourselves, 
have shame for yourselves. For shame itself is part of the remis- 
sion. For out of pity the Lord commanded that no one should 
repent in secret. For from the fact that he speaks for himself to 
the priest, and conquers his shame, through the fear of God's anger 
results the pardon of his sin. For it is made venial by confession 
which was criminal in the performance, and if it is not purged at 
once, it is nevertheless made venial, which was mortal when he com- 
mitted it. For he has offered much satisfaction who ruled his shame 
and denied to the messenger of God nothing of those things which 
he had committed. For God who is merciful and just, just as he 
preserves mercy in justice, so also preserves justice in mercy. For 
the work of mercy is to forgive the sins of the sinner ; but it is neces- 
sary that the just one show mercy justly. For he considers if the 
sinner is worthy, I do not say, of justice, but even of mercy; for 
justice alone condemns, but he deserves mercy who seeks grace by 
spiritual labor. For the mind labors when it suffers shame; and 
since a feeling of shame is great punishment, he who is ashamed for 



* Ep. 108. (alias 83. adTheodor. Foroitil. episc.) c. 2; C. Multiplex. (49.), ibid. 
' De vera et falsa Poenitentia (spurious), c. 10. n. 25; C. Quern poenitet (88.)^ 
ibid. See Luke 17, 14 and Levit. 14, 4. 



i84 APPENDIX 

the sake of Christ becomes worthy of mercy. Wherefore it is clear 
that to the more persons one confesses the baseness of his offence, 
the more easily does one gain the grace of remission. For the 
priests themselves are able to accomplish more and spare those who 
confess more." Also Pope Leo^ : "Although a fullness of faith seems 
to be laudable, which through fear of God does not fear to be 
ashamed before men; yet — because everyone's sins are not of such 
a kind that those which demand penance may be freely published, — 
let the unwise custom be abolished, lest many be kept from the 
remedies of penance, because they are either ashamed or afraid to 
reveal their deeds to their enemies, by whom they may be ruined 
through the provisions of the laws. For confession suffices, which 
is first offered to God, and then to the priest, who acts as intercessor 
for the sins of the penitents. For many can be incited to penance, 
if the conscience of the one who confesses is not published to the ears 
of the people." — By these and many other statements we are shown 
beyond a doubt that it is necessary that confession be offered first 
to God, and then to the priest ; nor can the sinner otherwise approach 
the entrance of paradise, if he had an opportunity to confess. 

PART III 

IV. Whether it suffices to confess to a layman. 

Now before we cite in reply to the authorities previously quoted 
those which seem to contradict them, let us consider the third ques- 
tion. For the content of the second question, that is, whether it 
would suffice to confess to God alone without the confession and 
judgment of the priest, has been considered, and it has been estab- 
lished by the testimonies quoted, that it does not suffice to confess 
to God without the priest, nor is the sinner truly humble and peni- 
tent, if he does not desire and seek the judgment of the priest. 
But is it of equal value for any one to confess to a companion 
or to a neighbor, at least when the priest is away? — 'Certainly it 
can be said on this point that the examination of a priest should 
be zealously sought, because God has granted to priests the power 
of binding and loosing. And therefore those whom they forgive 



^Ep. i68. (alias 136. ad univers. episc. per Campaniam) c. 2; C. Quamvis 
plenitudo fidei (89.), ibid. 



DISTINCTION XVII 185 

God also forgives. If however a priest is lacking, confession is 
to be made to a neighbor or companion. But let each one take 
care to seek a priest, who knows how to bind and loose. For 
he ought to be that, who judges the offences of others. Where- 
fore Augustine^ : "Let him who wishes to confess his sins in order 
to obtain pardon, see a priest who knows how to bind and loose, 
lest, if he be negligent about himself, he be neglected by him who 
with mercy warns and seeks him, and then both fall into the snare, 
which in his folly he refused to shun. So great is the power of 
confession that if the priest is away, he should confess to his neigh- 
bor. For it often happens that the penitent cannot humble himself 
in the presence of a priest, whom the time and place fail to supply 
when he desires him. But although he confesses to one who has not 
the power of loosing, he becomes worthy of pardon from his desire 
for a priest, when he confesses his sin to his companion. For the 
lepers were cleansed while they were going to show themselves or 
their faces to the priests, before they reached them. Wherefore it 
is clear that God looks within at the heart, when anyone is pre- 
vented by necessity from reaching the priests. Often persons who 
are well and happy, seek the priests, but while they are seeking and 
before they arrive, they die. But the mercy of God is everywhere, 
and knows how to spare the just, even if not so quickly, as if they 
were loosed by the priest." **And if the sin is secret, let it suffice 
to bring it to the knowledge of the priest. For at the raising of the 
daughter of the ruler of the synagogue^ few were present to witness 
it; for not yet had she been buried, not yet borne out of the door, 
not yet carried to public gaze outside the house. He raised her 
indoors, whom he found indoors, only Peter and James and John 
and the father and mother of the girl were left with him, and in 
them, are prefigured the priests of the Church. But observe how 
he raised those persons whom he found out of doors. For a crowd 
was weeping for the son of the widow, Martha and Mary wept pray- 
ing for their brother, and the crowd that followed Mary also wept. 



^ De vera et falsa Poenitentia, c. lo. n. 25; C. Qui vult confiteri (i), ibid. d. 6. 
See Matt. 15, 14; Luke 17, 14. 

The next passage, ibid. c. 11. n. 26; cf. Gratian, C. Quis aliquando (87.), 
ibid. d. I. §12. 

- Matt. 9, 24; Mark 5, 37; Luke 7, 11 ; John 11, 33. — The following passage 
is in the same book, c. 12. n. 27; C. Qui vult, modo cit. 



i86 APPENDIX 

Whereby we are taught that for those who sin in public not their 
own but the Church's merit is sufficient." "Therefore let the peni- 
tent labor to be in the Church and to hold to the unity of the Church. 
For unless the unity of the Church succor him, unless it completes 
what the sinner lacks in his own prayer, his soul when he is dead 
will not be snatched from the enemy. For we must believe that all 
the prayers and alms of the Church and works of justice and 
mercy help him who recognizes his own death to his conversion. 
And therefore no one can worthily repent, whom the unity of 
the Church does not support; and therefore let no one seek priests 
separated by any guilt from the unity of the Church." — By these 
words the matter of the foregoing question is made clear and ex- 
plained. A wise and discreet priest should be sought, who with 
power has at the same time judgment, and if by chance he is absent, 
confession should be made to a companion. — But Bede^ distin- 
guishes between confession of venial and of mortal sins, in his 
comment in this passage: "Confess your sins to one another." 
For he says : "Let us make known our daily and trivial sins, to 
our equals, but the more serious to a priest, and let us take care 
to purge ourselves of them within the time he bids, because with- 
out confession for amendment, sins cannot be forgiven." But the 
more grievous sins are also to be made known to our equals, when 
the priest is away, and danger threatens. But venial sins, even when 
there is an abundance of priests, may be confessed to an equal, and 
it is sufficient, as some think, provided that the priest is not neglected 
from contempt. However it is safer and more perfect to make 
known sins of both kinds to the priests, and to seek the prescription 
of medicine from them, to whom is granted the power of binding 
and loosing. 

V. What value confession has. 

Since therefore from these and many other testimonies it is 
made clear and established beyond a doubt that sins are to be con- 
fessed first to God, next, to the priest, and if he is not available, to a 
companion; the words of John Chrysostom cited above, are not to 
be understood in the sense that it is allowable for anyone who 
has time, not to confess to a priest; but that it suffices where an 



* In lac. 5, i6, and in Glossa interlinearis on the same passage. 



DISTINCTION XVII 187 

offence is secret, to tell it to God alone, through the priest and once 
only, nor is it necessary to publish what is secret in the presence of 
many ; he indicated this when he said : *T do not say to you that you 
should denounce yourself in public." For just as a public wrong 
needs a public remedy, so also a secret wrong is purged by a secret 
confession and secret satisfaction. Nor need we confess again what 
we have once confessed to a priest; but with the tongue of the heart, 
not of the flesh, we should confess continually to the true judge. 
Wherefore John^ also says: "Now if you remember your sins, and 
frequently tell them in the sight of God, and pray earnestly for their 
pardon, you will blot them out more quickly. But if you forget 
them, then you will remember them when you do not wish, when they 
are published and produced in the sight of all friends and enemies, 
and of the holy angels." — So also the passage from Ambrose : ''Tears 
wash away the sin, which we are ashamed to confess with the voice," 
is to be referred to public penance. For he shows therein the virtue 
of tears and confession, and implies that hidden tears and secret 
confession, like that made to a priest alone, wash away the sin, which 
one is ashamed to confess publicly. But when he says he has read 
that the tears of Peter were not satisfaction or confession ; by this 
he does not exclude what we have just said. For many things 
occurred, which are not written down, or perhaps the institution of 
confession had not yet been established^, as it is now. — Likewise 
also this saying of Prosper: "If they are made their own judges, 
they will alter the eternal punishments" ; and this : "They will please 
God more easily who either make known their offence by their own 
confessions, or if others are ignorant, pass sentence of excommunica- 
tion upon themselves" ; ought to be understood of public confession 
and satisfaction. For not to priests alone was the power of binding 
and loosing given, if each man may bind himself according to his own 
judgment by penance or sentence of excommunication, and without 
sacerdotal judgment reconcile himself to God and to the altar ; a view 
which is wholly repugnant to ecclesiastical institution and custom. 
Therefore it is better if you sinned publicly to confess yourself guilty 
publicly, and make amends ; but if you have offended in secret, even 
so you are not to be silent ; nor yet do I say that you should proclaim 



^ Homil. 31. in Ep. ad Hebr. n. 4; C. Quis aliquando, supra cit. §1. 
^ So Sum. Sent. tr. 6. c. 10. 



1 88 APPENDIX 

it." For silence about sin is born of pride of heart. For it is for 
this reason that a man conceals his sin, lest he be reckoned generally 
what he has shown himself to be in the divine sight; a fear which 
springs from the fountain of pride. For the character of pride is 
that the man who is a sinner wishes to seem just ; and a man is con- 
victed of hypocrisy who like our first parents tries to lighten his 
sins by a subterfuge of words, or like Cain aims to suppress his sins 
by keeping silence. Where therefore pride reigns and hypocrisy, 
humility has no place ; but without humility no one is allowed to hope 
for pardon. When therefore there is reticence in confession, there 
is no hope of pardon for the offence." ^ — Now certainly it is clear 
how detestable is silence concerning sin and conversely how neces- 
sary is confession. For confession is the witness of a conscience 
which fears God. For the man who fears the judgment of God will 
not be ashamed to confess his sin. Perfect fear casts out all shame ; 
the confession of sin involves shame, and shame itself is a severe 
punishment. And therefore we are commanded to confess our sins 
that we may suffer shame as a punishment; for this itself is a part 
of the divine judgment. — If therefore we are asked whether confes- 
sion is necessary, since by contrition sin is blotted out; we say that 
it is some punishment of sin, as is the satisfaction by deed. And 
through confession the priest knows how he ought to judge of the 
offence; through it, moreover, the sinner is made more humble and 
careful. 



^Gratian, C. Quis aliquando, supra cit. §15. See Gen. 3, 10; 4, 9. This 
opinion of the Master, at the end is obsolete. Cf. Bonaventura, d. 18. p. I. a. 2. 
q. I. 



Distinction XVIII 

PART I 

I. Of the remission which the priest grants. 

Here we are generally asked if a sin is wholly forgiven by God, 
for contrition of the heart, at the time the penitent had the desire 
to confess, what is afterward forgiven by the priest. For I know 
with what chain the priest binds the sinner, that, namely, of temporal 
punishment, but not from what he absolves him. And on this 
account I ask. Certainly the soul has the stain of the deed and the 
noisomeness of the sin before the penance of the heart, and it is 
bound by the chain of eternal vengeance. But if before confession 
God himself for contrition of the heart, without the ministry of the 
priest, both remits the debt entirely and purges the soul from the 
contagion and noisomeness of the sin; what then does the priest 
cleanse, what does he remit ? Where are those keys which the Lord 
gave to Peter and to his successors, saying^ : "I will give unto thee 
the keys of the kingdom of heaven ; and whatsoever thou shalt bind 
on earth, shall be bound also in heaven ; and whatsoever thou shalt 
loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven"? So that the aforesaid 
question may be explained more fully, just as the net was let down 
deeper, let us treat of these keys and their use. 

II. Of the keys. 

These keys are not corporeal, but spiritual, that is, "the knowl- 
edge of discerning and the power of judging," namely, of binding 
and loosing, by virtue of which the ecclesiastical judge "ought to 
receive the worthy and exclude the unworthy from the kingdom," 
and just as he has the power of binding, so he has that of loosing. 
Wherefore Ambrose^ : "The Lord wished the power of loosing and 
of binding to be equal, and bestowed both on the same condition. 
Therefore he who has not the power of loosing does not have the 



* Matt. 1 6, 19. Below, see Luke 5, 4. 

2 Lib. I. de Poenitentia, c. 2. n. 7; some words from the Glossa of Bede, (in 
Lyranus), on the passage of Matthew cited above. 

189 



I90 APPENDIX 

power of binding." And below^ : "It is certain that God grants both 
to the Church, but heresy has not both; for this power is given to 
priests only. Therefore the Church rightly lays claim to it for her- 
self, because she has true priests ; heresy cannot lay claim to it, be- 
cause it does not have true priests. 

III. Of the use of the keys. 

But there are several uses of these keys, first to distinguish 
those who must be bound or loosed, and then to bind or loose." For 
he who binds or looses those who do not deserve it, deprives him- 
self of his own power," 2 that is, makes himself worthy of depriva- 
tion. 

IV. Whether a priest can remit or retain sins. 

But we are asked, whether a priest has the power to absolve 
from sin, that is, from guilt, so that he wipes away the stain of sin, 
and is able to remit the debt of eternal death. — Some have thought 
that when the sinner is held doubly bound, as we said before, namely 
by disease and blindness of the mind, and by the debt of future 
punishment, the one is cured by God, the other remitted by the priest. 
For a man suffers through sin a kind of interior darkness and stain 
and unless he is released from these, he will be cast into outer dark- 
ness^ ; but when he is freed from these, he is raised from the death 
of sin. Wherefore the Apostle*: "Rise thou who sleepest, and 
Christ will illumine thee." For Christ alone, not the priest, re- 
awakens the soul, and when the interior darkness and stains have 
been banished, he illumines and cleanses it, and washes the face of 
the soul ; but he has granted to priests the power to loose the debt of 
eternal punishment. This they assert was signified in the resur- 
rection of Lazarus,^ for Christ himself first brought him to life 
within the tomb, then commanded him to come forth, and bade the 



* Lib. cit., ibid, below; II. de Cain et Abel, c. 4. n. 15; C. Verhum Dei (51.), 
de Poenitentia, d. i. 

2 Gregory, II. Homil. in Evang. homil. 26. n. 5. — ^The first opinion in the 
following passage is that of Hugh of St. Victor, II. de Sacram. p. XIV. c. 8. near 
the beginning, an attempt to refute the following opinion. 

3 Matt. 22, 13. 

4 Eph. 5, 14. 

* John II, 14. 



DISTINCTION XVIII 191 

apostles loose him who was still bound; because, as they say, he 
himself cleanses the soul within from the darkness and stain of sin, 
but has given to priests the power to loose the chain of eternal death. 

But others say that only God, not the priest, remits the debt of 
eternal death, even as also he himself makes the spirit alive within; 
yet they do not deny that to priests was given the power of remitting 
and retaining sins, for to them he said : "Whose sins ye remit," ^ etc. 
For as Christ has retained to himself the power of baptism, so also 
of penance. And therefore just as he illumines the soul within by 
his grace, so also at the same time he remits the debt of eternal death. 
For he himself of himself covers the sins of penitents ; and he covers 
them when he does not reserve them for punishment. Therefore he 
covers them when he loosens the debt of punishment. And that he 
himself does cover, Augustine clearly says in his explanation of this 
passage of the Psalm^: "Whose sins are covered," that is "covered 
wholly and effaced. For if God covered sins, he did not wish to 
observe them; if he did not wish to observe, he did not wish to mark 
them, that is punish them, but rather to pardon them. So therefore 
Augustine says they are 'covered by God,' that God may not see, 
that is, eternally punish." For God's seeing of sins is imputing of 
punishment. But to turn his face from sins, is not to reserve them 
for punishment. Also Jerome^ : "When God remits anyone's sins, 
he covers them, lest they be revealed in the judgment." Also Cassio- 
dorus*: "To some persons who have grievous sins, God imputes 
them, to others through mercy, he does not impute them." 

From these citations it is clearly shown that God himself 
absolves the penitent from the debt of punishment, and absolves him 
when he illumines him within by inspiring true contrition of heart. 
This opinion is favored by reason and confirmed by the authorities. 
For no one is truly grieved by his sin, and has a contrite and humble 
heart, save in charity; and he who has charity is worthy of eternal 
life. But no one is worthy at the same time of life and of death : 
therefore he is not bound by the debt of eternal death. For he 



* John 20, 23. 
■/? Ps. 31, i; Enarrat. 2. n. 9; cf. Enarrat. in Ps. 50, n. 14, where the explana- 
tion of what follows is given. 

3 This is in the Glossa ad Ps. 31, 2. 

4 Ibid. 



192 APPENDIX 

ceased to be a "son of wrath" from the time he began to love and do 
penance. Therefore from that time he was loosed from wrath, 
which does not remain on one who believes on Christ, but on one 
who does not believe. Accordingly he is not freed afterward from 
eternal wrath by the priest to whom he confesses, since he was 
already freed from it by the Lord, at the time he said : "I will con- 
fess." Therefore God alone cleanses a man inwardly from the stain 
of sin, and absolves him from the debt of eternal punishment: for 
he says through the Prophet^ : *T alone blot out the iniquities and 
sins of the people." Also Ambrose^: **The word of God forgives 
sins, the priest is the judge. The priest indeed performs his office, 
but does not exercise rights of any power." The same^ : "He alone 
forgives sins, who alone died for our sins." Also Augustine* : "No 
one takes away sins, save God alone, who is the Lamb that takes 
away the sins of the world. Now he takes them away both by 
remitting what have been committed, and by giving help so that 
they be not committed again and by leading to eternal life, where cer- 
tainly they cannot be committed." — By these and many more testi- 
monies we are shown that the Lord himself alone remits sin; and 
just as he remits the sin of some persons so also he retains the sins 
of some others. 

V. How priests remit sin, or retain it. 

We do not, however, deny that the power of remitting and 
retaining sins was conceded to priests, since the Truth clearly teaches 
this is the Gospel. Hence Augustine^ says: "The charity of the 
Church which is poured out by the holy Spirit in the hearts of those 
who are sharers of it, remits sins ; but it retains the sins of those who 
are not sharers of it." Also^ : "Priests can spare those who confess : 
for unto whom they remit sins, God remits. For he gave Lazarus 
raised from the tomb to the Apostles to be loosed, showing by this 



» Is. 43, 25. 

2 II. de Cain et Abel c. 4. n. 15, but the words and opinion are somewhat 
different; C. Verhum Dei (51.), supra cit. 

* Exposit. in Evang. Lucae. lib. VI. n. 109. 

* I. de Peccator, merit, et remissione, gathered from cc. 23. 28. 39; C. Nemo 
toUit (141.), de Consecrat. d. 4. 

*In loan. Evang. tract. 121. n. 4; C. Ecclesiae (140), ibid. 

* De vera et falsa Poenitentia (spurious) c. 10. n. 25. 



DISTINCTION XVIII 193 

act that the power of loosing was granted to priests. For he said: 
'Whatsoever ye shall loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven/ etc. ; 
that is: 'I God, and the orders of all the heavenly court, and all of 
the saints in my glory, approve and confirm with you whom *you 
bind and loose.' He did not say 'whom you think you bind and 
loose' ; but 'on whom you exercise the work of justice or of mercy. 
Otherwise I do not recognize works of other kind performed by 
you for sinners.' " The same^ : "When sins are remitted unto one 
who has truly turned to God, they are remitted by those to whom 
he is joined by true conversion. They are remitted by the holy 
Spirit, who is given to all saints cleaving to him in charity, whether 
they know him in the body or not. Likewise when anyone's sins are 
retained, they are retained by those from whom he is separated by 
the perverseness of his heart, whether known to him in the body or 
unknown." "For all the wicked are spiritually separated from the 
good." 2 — Behold, he says that sins are remitted, or retained by holy 
men, and yet he says the holy Spirit remits them. And, he also says 
something worthy of greater consideration, that God himself or 
through the saints only, remits them. For he says^ : "God gives the 
sacrament of grace even through the wicked, but grace itself only 
through himself or his saints. And therefore he performs the remis- 
sion of sins either himself or through the members of the dove to 
whom he says: 'If you forgive anyone, he shall be forgiven.'"* — 
See, what various opinions are taught by the doctors on these 
matters; and in such variety as this, which opinion is to be held? 
This we may certainly say and think, that God alone remits sins and 
retains them ; and yet he has conferred upon the Church the power 
of binding and loosing, but he himself looses or binds in one way, 
the Church in another. For he remits sin through himself alone, 
for he both cleanses the soul from the inner stain and releases it 
from the debt of eternal death. 

VI. How priests bind or loose from sins. 

But he did not grant this power to priests although he did grant 
them the power of binding and loosing, that is, of showing that 

* Aug., Lib. VI. de Baptismo contra Donatist. c. 4. n. 6. 

* Ibid. c. 5. n. 7. 

' Ibid. V. c. 21. n. 29; C. Quomodo exaudit (41.), de Consecrat. d. 4. 
<John 20, 23. 



194 APPENDIX 

men are bound or loosed — wherefore the Lord himself first restored 
the leper to health, and then sent him to the priests, by whose deci- 
sion he was shown to be cleansed ; so also after Lazarus was brought 
to life he gave him to the disciples to be loosed — ^because even if 
anyone is loosed by God, he is not on that account held to be loosed 
in the sight of the Church, except through the judgment of the priest. 
Therefore in loosing or retaining guilt, the priest of the Gospel so 
works and judges as the priest of the law in times past for those who 
were contaminated with leprosy, which signifies sin. Wherefore 
Jerome in his commentary on Matthew,^ where the Lord says to 
Peter: "I will give thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and 
whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth, shall be bound also in heaven ; 
and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, shall be loosed in 
heaven" 2 : "Some persons who do not understand this passage," 
he says, "assume something of the superciliousness of the Pharisees, 
so that they think they are to condemn the harmless and loose the 
harmful, when it is not the opinion of the priests, but the life of the 
doers, which is regarded by God. In Leviticus the lepers are com- 
manded to show themselves to the priests, not that they make them 
lepers or clean, but that they distinguish who are clean or unclean ; 
so also here." — It is here clearly shown that God does not always 
follow the judgment of the Church which judges sometimes dishon- 
estly and ignorantly ; but God always judges according to truth. And 
in remitting or retaining sins the priests of the Gospel have the power 
and office, which formerly the priests of the Law had under the Law 
in curing lepers. They therefore remit or retain sins, in so far as 
they judge and declare them to be remitted or retained by God. For 
the priests invoke "the name of he Lord on the sons of Israel, but 
he himself blesses," as we read in Numbers.^ This way of binding 
and loosing Jerome indicated above. 

Priests also bind when they impose the satisfaction of penance 
on those who confess ; they loose when they remit any of the satis- 
faction, or admit persons purged by it to the communion of the sacra- 
ments, which method Pope Leo mentioned above.* In this way 



^ Lib. III. c. 16. V. 19. See Levit. 14, 2. 
2 Matt. 16, 19. 
' Numbers 6, 27, 
* Dist. XVII. c. 3. 



DISTINCTION XVIII 195 

priests are also said to remit sins or to retain them. Wherefore 
Augustine said above^ : 'To whom they remit sins, God also remits," 
etc. For they perform the work of justice on sinners when they 
bind them by a just penalty; the work of mercy, when they relax 
any of it, or restore them to the communion of the sacraments ; they 
cannot perform other works for sinners. — And it must be noted that 
those whom they bind by the satisfaction of penance, they show by 
that very act to be loosed from sins, because penitential satisfaction 
is not imposed on anyone unless the priest judges him truly peni- 
tent. But they do not impose it on others^ ; and by that they judge 
that the sin is retained by God, Now that this power belongs to the 
keys Augustine shows when he says: "He cheats the keys of the 
Church, who does penance without the judgment of the priest, if he 
prays for mercy for his offence without confession of the mouth." 

PART II 

And there is another way of binding and loosing, which is per- 
formed by excommunication, when anyone is called for the third 
time to amend a manifest sin according to the canonical discipline, 
and disdaining to make satisfaction, is cut off by sentence of the 
Church from the place of prayer, and the communion of the sacra- 
ments, and the fellowship of the faithful, so that he may blush and 
be converted by shame at his crime, and may be sorry and repent, 
and that thus "his soul may be saved." ^ Because if he returns to wis- 
dom, avowing his penance, he is admitted to the communion, which 
had been denied him and is reconciled to the Church. And this 
is the anathema of the Church, it inflicts this penance on those who 
are rightfully chastised, that the grace of God and his protection are 
farther removed from them, and they are left to themselves, so as 
to be free to rush into the death of sin and a greater power of wreak- 
ing rage upon them is given to the devil. Likewise the prayers of 
the Church and the aids of its benedictions and merits are not 
thought to support them at all. 



* Above, c. 5. 

' Serm. 392. (alias, homily 49 among 50 Homil.) c. 3. n. 3; Gratian, C. Quis 
aliquando (87.), de Poenit. d. i. 
» I. Cor. 5, 5. 



196 APPENDIX 

VII. How we are to understand this saying: 'Whatsoever ye shall 
loose,'' etc. 

According to these ways of binding and loosing, how is that 
saying true : ''Whatsoever ye shall loose on earth, shall be loosed in 
heaven, and whatsoever ye shall bind on earth, shall be bound in 
heaven?" For sometimes they declare loosed or bound those who 
are not so with God; and sometimes they bind by the penalty of 
satisfaction or of excommunication those who do not deserve it, or 
loose them, and admit the unworthy to the sacraments, and exclude 
those who are worthy to be admitted. — But the saying must be 
understood of those persons whose merits demand that they be loosed 
or bound. For then the opinion of the priest is approved and con- 
firmed by the judgment of God and of the whole celestial court, since 
it proceeds from discretion so that the merits of the guilty do not 
contradict it. Whomsoever therefore they loose or bind, applying 
the key of discretion to the merits of the guilty, they are loosed or 
bound in heaven, that is, with God, because the opinion of the priest 
thus formed is approved and confirmed by divine judgment. Whom 
therefore the sentence of the Church condemns according to his 
deserts, it destroys; and the man is outside the Church in the sight 
of God. — But whoever has not earned it, is not destroyed by the sen- 
tence of the Church, unless he scorns it. Wherefore Origen^ : "Any- 
one who departs from truth, from faith, from charity, thereby departs 
from the fortress of the Church, even if not cast out by the voice 
of the bishop, just as, on the contrary, no one is driven out by an 
unjust judgment; but if he did not so act that he deserved to go out,, 
he is not hurt. For sometimes he who is driven out, is inside; and 
he who is outside, seems to remain within." — See of what kind and 
what extent is the use of the apostolic keys. Now it has been shown 
in part how the priests forgive sins or retain them, and yet how 
God has retained for himself a certain unique power of remitting or 
retaining sins, because he himself alone by himself looses the debt 
of eternal death, and purges the soul within. 

VII I. What the inner darkness and inner stains are. 

Here we are asked what these stains are and what this inner 
darkness, from which God cleanses the soul within, when he sends 



* Homil. 14. in Levit. n. 3. 



DISTINCTION XVIII 197 

true penance. — As for the darkness and the inner gloom it is easy 
enough both to understand and to answer. For when anyone sins 
mortally, he is deprived of the grace of virtue, if he had previously 
possessed any, and he suffers the destruction of his natural good qual- 
ities. Wherefore also the intellect is dulled, and the whole inner man 
is darkened; and thus his mind is enveloped in a sort of obscurity, 
which is the punishment of sin. But this obscurity God dispels, when 
he sends penance, through which he restores the good qualities which 
were destroyed, and repairs those which were injured. Wherefore 
the Prophet^ : "He scatters the mists as ashes." — But what is the 
stain of sin, from which he cleanses the soul? Suppose now that 
a man has wished to commit murder and has accomplished it, and 
when he has accomplished it, he ceases both to desire it and to do it ; 
but he does not yet truly and humbly do penance, nor does he pur- 
pose to confess. What stain therefore has remained in his soul? 
An evil will certainly was the stain of his soul, but that has passed ; 
also it is a stain if he scorns to do penance; but this sin is different 
from the preceding. What stain therefore has remained, from which 
he is purged in penance ? — The soul is surely polluted, until the peni- 
tent does penance, even as it was, while the evil will was in it. For 
just as a man who touches carrion or any other unclean thing,^ is 
polluted after the touch until he washes, just as he was while he was 
touching it; so after the act of sin the soul remains polluted just as 
it was in the very act of sin, because through unlikeness it is as far 
from God, who is the life and purity of the mind, as it was while it 
was committing the sin. Therefore that very unlikeness which is the 
mark of the soul from sin and is a removal from God is understood 
as the stain of the soul, from which it is purged in penance. But 
the purging God alone performs, who alone awakens the soul and 
illumines it; and the priests are unable to perform it, although they 
are the physicians of souls. Wherefore the Prophet^ : ''Shall physi- 
cians raise to life, and give praise to thee?" Explaining this passage 
Augustine says* : "Good teachers are rightly called physicians, for 
they are able to cure the living by their ministry, but not to arouse 
the dead ; for only by the grace of God are the dead made alive again. 

* Ps. 147, 16. 

- Levit. II, 31; Numbers 19, 22. 
»Ps. 87, II. 

* Enarrat. in Ps. 87. n. 10. 



Distinction XIX 

I. When these keys are given and to whom. 

Now that it has been shown what the apostolic keys are, and what 
their use is; it remains to find out when these keys are given, and 
to whom. — ^These keys are given by the ministry of the bishop to 
a man when he is promoted to the priesthood ; for when he receives 
the sacerdotal orders, he also receives these keys at the same time. — 
But it does not seem that all priests or only priests have these keys, 
because many have the knowledge to distinguish before sacred ordi- 
nation, and many lack it after consecration. We can say rightly 
that all priests do not have one of these keys, namely, the knowl- 
edge to distinguish, on which account we must grieve and lament. 
For many persons, although indiscreet and lacking the knowledge 
in which they ought to excel, presume to receive the grade of 
priesthood, unworthy of it in life and in knowledge, who neither 
before priesthood, nor after, have the knowledge to distinguish, 
who should be bound and who loosed. Therefore they do not 
receive that key in ordination, because they always lack the knowl- 
edge. But those who before priesthood are endowed with the 
knowledge to discern, although they have discretion, yet have not 
the key, because they have not the power to close or open with it. 
Therefore when a man is promoted to the priesthood, he is rightly 
said to receive the key of discretion, because the discretion he had 
before is increased and is made a key for him, so that then he has 
power to use it for closing or opening. 

And since it is now evident that not all priests have these two 
keys, because many lack the knowledge to distinguish; as regards 
the other key, that is, the power of binding and loosing, we are asked 
whether all priests have that. — For some think the power is granted 
only to those who follow both the doctrine and life of the apostles. 
For the Lord promised the keys only to Peter and his imitators, they 
say ; and they cite authorities in support of their opinion. For they 
The same in his commentary on Exodus,^ where the golden plate is 

* Preceding distinction, c. 5, that is, V. de Baptismo contra Donatist. c. 21. 
n. 29. 

198 



DISTINCTION XIX 199 

himself or through the members of the dove gives remission of sins." 
Augustine also says that sins are remitted or retained by the saints. 
The same in his commentary on Exodus,^ where the golden plate is 
spoken of: "And there was always a golden plate on the brow of 
the priest" : "This," he says, "signifies the assurance of a good life, 
and only the priest who has this truly and perfectly, not in symbol, 
but in truth, can take away sins." Also Gregory^ : "They only, while 
in the flesh, have the power of binding and loosing like the holy 
apostles who follow their examples as well as their doctrines." Also 
from the words of Origen : "This power was granted to Peter only, 
and to the imitators of Peter. For those who imitate the steps of 
Peter, have rightly the power of binding and loosing." By these 
and many other testimonies they support their case, who assert that 
the power of binding and of loosing was granted to those priests 
only, who in life and doctrine are equal to the apostles. 

But it seems to others, and also I confess to me, that to all 
priests is given this key, that is, of binding and loosing; but they do 
not have it rightly and worthily unless they follow the apostolic life 
and doctrine. Nor do the preceding authorities deny that evil priests 
have this power, but they mean that only those priests use the power 
worthily and rightly, who are endowed with apostolic life and 
doctrine, because only the imitators of the apostles themselves can 
worthily and rightly bind and loose. And only by the Lord or by 
saints in whom the holy Spirit dwells, is remission or retention of 
sins worthily and rightly awarded. Nevertheless it is awarded also 
by those who are not saints, but not worthily or rightly. For God 
gives benediction to one who worthily asks it, even through an un- 
worthy minister. But that all priests have this power, Jerome^ testi- 
fies in his exposition of that passage of the Gospel where the Lord 
said to Peter: "I will give you the keys of heaven": "For other 
apostles," he says, "have the same judiciary power; and the whole 
Church has it through the bishops and presbyters. But Peter re- 



^ II, Quaestion. in Pentateuch, q. 120; see Exod. 28, 38. 

2 Lib^ 11^ Homil. in Evang. homil. 26. n. 4. seq,; II. Dialog, c. 23; cf. Sum. 
Sent. tr. 6. c. 14, where is also found the following passage of Origen, Comment, 
in Matt. Lib. XII. n. 9. 

3 Not found in Jerome, but in the Glossa Matt. 16, 17. and in Rabanus, 
V. Comment, in Matt. loc. cit., who took the first part from Bede, on the same 
passage. Cf. also C. Si iustus (30.), C. i. q. i. and C. Ut evitentur (82.)^ ibid. 



200 APPENDIX 

ceived it specially so that all might know that whosoever separates 
himself from the unity of the faith and the fellowship of the Church, 
can neither be loosed from sin nor enter heaven." 

II. Whether worthy grace can be imparted by an unworthy priest. 

Also that a priest, even if he be wicked, yet imparts grace ac- 
cording to the office of his dignity, Augustine^ shows when he says : 
"The Lord spake in Numbers, to the priests Moses and Aaron: 
^Invoke my name on the sons of Israel, and I the Lord will bless 
them' ; so that he might impart to men the grace given through the 
ministry of a priest ordained, nor might the will of the priests hinder 
or profit it, but the merit of the one who asked a benediction. But 
let us now consider how great the dignity of the sacerdotal office 
and order is. It is said among other things of the wicked Caiaphas : 
'But this he did not speak of himself, but since he was the high-priest 
of that year, he prophesied' ; by which it is shown that the Spirit of 
graces does not have regard to the person of a worthy or unworthy 
man but to his order by consecration; so that no matter how great 
merit anyone may have, he cannot bless unless he has been ordained, 
that he may perform the ministry of his office. But it belongs to God 
to give the effect of benediction." — Hereby it is clearly shown that 
the office is not deprived of the power of granting grace on account of 
unworthiness in the minister. — To this opinion of Augustine, how- 
ever, the words of Hesychius^ seem opposed: 'Triests," he says, 
"do not bless by their own power, but because they represent Christ, 
and on account of him who is in them, grant the fullness of benedic- 
tion; nor is it only he who has received priesthood, but whoever 
has Christ in him, and bears his image through good conversation, 
like Moses, is suitable to give benediction." — Behold here you have 
that not only the priest, but everyone in whom Christ dwells may 
give the benediction. But there is one benediction which is suited 
to priests alone, another which is used in common by all good men. 
Finally those priests, in whom Christ dwells, are said to impart the 
fullness of benediction, not because they alone transmit grace, but 
because they alone lawfully and worthily do it. Nor does the evil 



^Quaestion. ex veteri testam. (spurious) q. ii; C. Dictum est (96.), ibid- 
See Num. 6, 27, and below John 11, 51. 
* Lib. II. in Levit. (9, 23.) 



DISTINCTION XIX 201 

life of the priest hurt persons placed under him, if they do the good 
deeds which he tells them. Wherefore Gregory^ : ''Many, while they 
scrutinize the life of the priests more than their own, fall into the 
pitfall of error, not considering that the life of the priests would 
not hurt them if they would humbly lend their ears to the good 
admonitions of the priests/' 

III. How we must understand the words: "I zvill curse your bless- 

ings/' 

But the preceding view, that even through the ministry of an 
evil priest, the grace of benediction is transimitted, seems contradicted 
by the warning of the Lord against evil priests through the prophet 
Malachi^: *T will curse your blessings"; and in another place,^ 
"Woe to those who save souls alive which do not live,'* and "kill 
souls which do not die." For if the Lord curses their blessings and 
if the souls which they save alive do not live, how is the grace of 
benediction transmitted through them? — But this chapter: "I will 
curse," etc., is applied by some persons to the heretics who are cut off 
from the Church, and to the excommunicate whose benedictions are 
made maledictions to those who follow their errors. And this other 
passage, namely: "They save alive," etc., they interpret of all those 
priests, who without the key of knowledge and the form of a good 
life presume to bind or loose. But no one ought to fill the office of 
priest, unless he be immune from those sins which he judges in 
others ; otherwise he condemns himself. 

IV. What sort of man the ecclesiastical judge ought to be. 

Now what sort of man he ought to be who is appointed judge 
of others, Augustine describes when he says*: "A priest to whom 
is brought every sinner, before whom every weakness is declared, 
ought not to be liable to judgment for any of those offences, which 
he is prompt to judge in another. For in judging another, a man 
who deserves to be judged, condemns himself. Therefore let him 



* Can. MuUi saecularium (84.), ibid. 

2 Mai. 2, 2. 

3 Ezek. 13, 19. 

* De vera et falsa Poenitentia, c. 20. n. 36. (among his works) ; C. Qui vult 
confiteri (i.) de Poenitentia. d. 6. § 2. 3. See Rom. 2, i, and next John 8, 7. 



202 APPENDIX 

know himself, and purge in himself the guilt that he sees others 
present to him ; let him take care to cast out from himself whatever 
he finds to be condemned in others. Let him remember, 'he who is 
without sin, let him first cast a stone upon her.' For the Lord freed 
the sinful woman, because there was not one who could justly cast a 
stone. How should he stone, who recognized himself as deserving 
to be stoned? There was no one without sin; by which we under- 
stand that all had been guilty of crime, for venial sins were remitted 
through ceremonies ; therefore whatever sin was in them it was crim- 
inal. Hereby therefore it is clear that we are to detest the crime 
of priests, who do not judge themselves before they bind others. — 
Let the spiritual judge beware that as he has not committed the 
offence of negligence, so he lacked not the gift of knowledge.; it is 
necessary that he should understand what he ought to judge. It is 
essential for judicial power to distinguish what it must judge. 
Therefore let the diligent investigator wisely ask of the sinner what 
perhaps he does not know or wishes, with a natural feeling of shame, 
to conceal. And when the offence is understood, let him not hesitate 
to investigate its details, both the place, and the time, and other 
matters of which we spoke above, and when he has learned these, 
let him be benevolently helpful, ready to rise and bear the burden 
with the sinner: let him have sweetness in his affection, discre- 
tion in variation, let him teach perseverance, let him take care 
lest he fall, lest he justly destroy his judiciary power. Even if pen- 
ance could win back grace for him, yet it would not soon restore 
him to his former power. Even if Peter after his fall was restored, 
and the power of their rank is often returned to fallen priests, yet it 
is not necessarily given back to everyone, as if by authority. One 
authority is found which gives and as it were commands ; other 
authority is found which does not give but forbids. And the Scrip- 
tures do not contradict this but agree. For since there are so many 
who fall, that with authority they might insist upon their former 
dignity and form a sort of habit of sinning, the hope of doing so 
must be cut off. But wherever there is a place where such things 
do not occur, the priests who sin can be restored." — By these words 
it is clearly indicated what sort of man a priest ought to be who binds 
and looses others, namely discreet and just; otherwise he often kills 
souls, which are not dead and saves alive those which are not alive ; 
and so he falls under the judgment of the curse. But the passage of 



DISTINCTION XIX 203 

Malachi, namely: 'T will curse your blessings," whether the words 
be applied to heretics only and to excommunicants, or to all priests, 
who, though lacking in life and knowledge, presume to bless, can 
be thus interpreted : I will curse your blessings, that is, "those which 
you possess in these blessings," ^ because I will make them turn to 
a curse upon you, not a blessing, for, even if they bless saints, they 
do not do it from a true heart, and therefore their blessing is turned 
into a curse upon them. Or "I will curse your blessings," that is, 
"what is blessed by you will be cursed by me," because they bless 
those who do evil and they flatter sinners, provided they are rich. 



1 This and the following passage is from Jerome, on Malachi 2, 2. 



Distinction XX 

PART I 

I. Of those who repent at the end. 

We must also realize that the time for penance extends even 
to the last moment of life. Wherefore Pope Leo^ : "No one should 
be despaired of while he is still in this body, because sometimes an 
act which is deferred by the diffidence of youth, is carried out by a 
maturer purpose." Augustine however writes as follows about those 
who defer their penance^ : "If anyone at the last extremity wishes to 
receive penance, and if he receives it and is soon reconciled, and goes 
hence, I acknowledge to you, that we do not refuse him what he asks, 
but we do not conclude that he departs in blessedness; if he goes 
hence safely, I do not know. We are able to give penance, but not 
safety. Do I say he will be condemned? But neither do I say he 
will be freed. Therefore do you wish to be free from doubt? Do 
penance while you are well. If you do so, I say to you that you are 
secure, because you did penance when you could have sinned. If 
you wish to do penance when you cannot sin, the sins have left you, 
not you them." Also^ : "There are two alternatives : either you will 
not be pardoned, or you will be pardoned; which of these will be 
yours, I do not know: therefore hold to what is certain, and leave 
what is uncertain." But why did Augustine say this, when the pen- 
ance, which is performed at the end, is called in the psalm an "even- 
ing sacrifice" * "which was more acceptable in the Law," and when 
on whatever day God is invoked, he is present, and at whatever hour 
the sinner laments and is converted he shall live and not die? 
Augustine said this on their account who defer penance to the end 
of life; and then do not seem to repent from love of God, but from 



*Ep. 167 (alias 92.) ad Rustic. Inquis. 7; C. Nemo desperandus (i.), de 
Poenitent. d. 7. 

2 Sermo 393. (alias 41. among 50 Homil.); C. Si quis positus (2.), ibid. 

3 Serm. cit.; C. Si quis autem (4.), ibid. § i. 
•* Ps. 140, 2; next Ps. 55, 10; Ezek. 18, 21, 

204 



DISTINCTION XX 205 

fear of death, as though of necessity. Wherefore again,i as though 
explaining why he said the above, he says : ''Let no one wait for the 
time when he cannot sin. For God requires freedom of the will, 
not necessity to efface what has been committed ; love not only fear, 
because man does not live in fear only. Whoever therefore repents, 
ought not only to fear the judge, but to love him; because no one 
can be saved without love. Let him therefore not only fear the 
penalty, but let him long for glory. And if conversion come to any- 
one at the end, we are not to despair of his remission. But since 
seldom or rarely is such a conversion so just, we must fear for a late 
penitent, especially when the children whom he has unlawfully loved 
are present, when his wife and the world call him to themselves. Late 
penance is wont to deceive many. But since God is always mighty, 
he can always help even in death those whom he will. Since there- 
fore fruitful penance is the work not of man but of God; he can 
inspire it when he wills by his mercy, and can reward with mercy 
those whom in justice he could condemn. But since there are many 
things which impede and deter a sick man, it is dangerous and near 
to ruin, to defer the remedy of penance until death. But it is a great 
remedy for him in whom God then inspires true penance, if there 
is any such person." "But even if the person thus converted lives 
and does not die, we do not promise that he will escape all penalty. 
For first he must be purged by the fire of purgatory, since he has 
deferred to another world the fruits of conversion, and this fire, even 
though it is not eternal, yet it is severe to an extraordinary degree; 
for it surpasses all punishment, which anyone has ever suffered in 
this life. Such punishment is never endured in the flesh, although 
the martyrs suffered wonderful torments, and many have often 
endured great punishments wrongly!" — From these quotations we 
are shown sufficiently how dangerous it is to defer penance to the 
end of life. If however a man has true penance even then, it frees 
him and secures life for one who is dead ; yet not so that he knows no 
punishment, unless by chance the vehemence of his groaning and 
contrition is so great, that it suffices for the punishment of his sin. 
"Therefore although it is difficult to have true penance when it comes 
so late, when pain besets the members and grief oppresses the senses, 



* De vera et falsa Poenitent. (spurious) c. 17. n. 33; following passage, ibid, 
c. 18. n. 34; both in C. Nullus expectet (6.), ibid. 



2o6 APPENDIX 

so that a man can hardly think at all, yet late penance is better than 
none." ^ "For penance even if it comes at the last gasp of Hfe, heals 
and frees." ^ "The penance of the thief was very late ; but the 
pardon was not late." ^ But "although* the thief in the end gained 
pardon from all sin, God did not give to persons baptized authority 
to sin and persevere." 

II. Of those who do not complete penance. 

But if we are asked concerning those persons who do not com- 
plete penance in this life, whether they will go through the fire^ of 
purgatory, in order to complete what here they failed to do in part ; 
we say that we must think the same of them as of those who repent 
at the last. For if there is such contrition of heart and remorse for 
sin that it suffices to punish sin; they go to eternal life free of all 
penalties, even if their penance was incomplete, because they did 
penance perfectly and groaned in heart. But those who are not so 
bruised in heart and do not groan so for sin, if they depart before 
the completion of their penance, they shall endure the fire of purga- 
tory, and suffer more grievously than if they had completed the pen- 
ance here; "for it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the 
living God." For since God is merciful and just, he mercifully for- 
gives the penitent, not reserving his sin to eternal punishment, but 
in justice he does not forgive unpunished sin. And either man pun- 
ishes, or God. Man punishes by doing penance, but God by demand- 
ing penance. There is both an inner penance, and an outer. If 
therefore the inner penance is so great, that it is a sufficient avenging 
of sin, God who knows this, does not demand further penance from 
him who did so great a penance. But if the inner penance is not 
sufficient to avenge the sin, and the outer penance is not complete, 
God who knows the kinds and measures of sins and of punishments, 
adds a sufficient punishment. "Let a man therefore study so to 
■correct his sins, that after death he need not endure punishment. 



* Hugh of St. Victor, II. de Sacram. p. XIV. c. 5. 

2 De vera et falsa Poenitent. c. 17. n. 33; can. cit. 

3 Hugh, loc. cit. 

* De vera et falsa Poenitent. loc. cit. a little above. See Luke 23, 42. 

5 See Heb. 10,. 31. For the following, cf. Aug., Enarrat. in Ps. 44. n. 18 
and Ps. 58, serm. i. n. 13. 



DISTINCTION XX 207 

For some mortal sins are made venial by penance ; yet they are not 
immediately healed. For often a sick man would die, if he were not 
treated, yet the physician does not immediately cure him. He is 
feeble afterwards though destined to live, who before was about to 
die. But he who dies impenitent, dies utterly, and is eternally tor- 
tured. For if he should Hve always, he would always sin." ^ 

PART II 

III. Of him on whom an indiscreet priest enjoined penance. 

But if we are asked regarding a man who has fulfilled the 
satisfaction required of him, which through the ignorance or negli- 
gence of the priest was not adequate for the sin, whether when he 
departs this life, he is free of all punishment; I make the same 
answer as I did above^ for him who did not complete his penance, 
that if the lament of inner grief is so great that it suffices to 
avenge the sin, he is entirely freed; but if the inner grief together 
with the penance enjoined upon him does not suffice, God will 
add punishment. But that sometimes inner grief suffices to avenge 
sin, we have a sure proof in the case of that thief, who only through 
contrition of the mind and confession, won entrance into paradise as 
soon as he was converted. But because the stewards of the Church 
do not weigh exactly the quantity of contrition, since they are not 
permitted to know the secrets of hearts; they establish laws of 
penance for all who grieve whether more or less for their sin. Their 
zeal ought to aim chiefly at weighing the grief of the heart as much 
as is right, so that according to its degree they may enjoin satisfac- 
tion. Wherefore Augustine^ : "In the performing of penance, where 
an act has been committed, so serious as to separate from the body 
of Christ the man who has committed it; we must not consider so 
much the extent of time of the penance as the extent of the grief : 
Tor a contrite and humble heart God will not despise.' But because 
often the grief of one heart is hidden from another and does not 
come to the notice of others unless it is revealed by words or by 



1 De vera et falsa Poenitent. c. 18. n. 34; can. cit. On the last proposition, 
cf. Gregory, XXXIV. Moral, c. 19. n. 36. 

2 Here c. 2. See Luke 23, 43. 

3 Enchirid. c. 65. n. 17; C. In actione (84.), de Poenitent. d. i. See Ps. 50, 
19, 37, 10 and II. Cor. 5, 5. 



2o8 APPENDIX 

some other signs, although it is open to him to whom it is said : *My 
groaning is not hid from thee' ; for this reason times of penance have 
rightly been established by those who rule over the Churches, so that 
the sinner may satisfy the Church, where the sins themselves are 
remitted; for outside it they certainly are not remitted. For it 
receives the holy Spirit as a pledge, without whom no sins are re- 
mitted." Also Jerome^ : "The canons therefore do not fix clearly 
enough the length of time for doing penance for each crime, so as to 
say of particular sins how each should be amended ; but rather they 
have determined that it should be left to the judgment of an under- 
standing priest, because with God the measure of time is not of such 
value as the measure of grief, nor abstinence from food as morti- 
fication of vices. Therefore they enjoin that the seasons of penance 
be shortened for the faith and conversation of faithful penitents ; for 
certain faults, however, measures of penance are imposed." 

IV. That satisfaction should not be required of the dying, but men- 
tioned to them. 

We are often asked also, whether the law of satisfaction should 
be imposed on persons about to die. Of this, Theodore bishop of 
Canterbury says in his penitential^ : "Simple confession of sins 
should be asked of the sick in danger of death, but the full extent of 
penance should not be imposed on them, though it must be mentioned, 
and the weight of penance should be lightened by the prayers of 
friends and by the bestowal of alms, if by chance the sick depart 
this life. But if they regain their health, let them fulfill diligently 
the measure of penance imposed by the priest." And for other 
persons the penance must be determined by the judgment of those in 
authority according to the nature of their sin. Wherefore Pope 
Leo^ : "The times of penance must be fixed by your judgment with 
moderation, according as you observe that the souls of the converts 
are devout. Equally also you ought to have regard for old age and 



^ Rather Alcuin, de Divinis Officiis, c. 13, who cites Jerome; C. Mensuram 
autem (86.), ibid. 

2 Fragments c. 48. (Migne, Patrol. Lat. XCIX. col. 977); C. Ab infirmis 
(i.), C. 26. q. 7. 

3 Ep. 159. (alias 79.) ad Nicetam Episc. c. 6; C. Tempora poenitudinis (2.), 
ibid. 



DISTINCTION XX 209 

to be mindful of dangers of all sorts and of the necessities of dis- 
ease." 

V. In an emergency penance and reconciliation must not he denied. 

We must also understand that in a time of emergency penance 
and reconciliation must not be denied to penitents. Wherefore Pope 
Leo^ : ** Satis faction must not be forbidden nor reconciliation denied 
to those who in a time of necessity and urgent danger implore the 
help of penance and speedy reconciliation, because we can set no 
measure to the mercy of God, nor limit the times." "And if^ they 
are so prostrated by some sickness, that they cannot at the moment 
make known what shortly before they asked for, the testimonies of 
faithful bystanders ought to aid them, and they should obtain at the 
same time the benefit of penance and reconciliation." Also Pope 
Julius^ : "If a presbyter denies penance to the dying, he will be the 
one responsible for their souls, because the Lord says : 'When he is 
converted, then will he be saved.' For there can be true confession at 
the last, because God is a respecter not only of the time but also of 
the heart, as the case of the thief proves." 

VI. That a presbyter should not reconcile anyone, without consult- 

ing the bishop, mtless necessity compels it. 

However a presbyter ought not reconcile a penitent without con- 
sulting the bishop, unless extreme necessity compels it. Wherefore 
in the canons of the Council of Carthage^ : "A presbyter shall not 
reconcile a penitent without consulting the bishop unless the bishop 
is absent or extreme necessity compels it. In the case of a penitent 
whose oflence is a public one, that has disturbed a whole city, let 
hands be laid on him before the choir, that is, at the entrance to the 
church." Likewise^ Bishop Aurelius said: "If anyone in danger 
seeks to be reconciled at the divine altar when the bishop is absent, 
the presbyter need not consult the bishop but reconcile the one in 
peril without the bishop's command." But without consulting the 



* Ep. 108. (alias 91.) ad Theod. c. 4; C. His qui tempore (10.), C. 26. q. 6. 

2 Ibid. c. 5; C. His qui tempore (10.), op. cit. 

3 Can. Si presbyter (12.), ibid. See Ezek. 18, 21. 27 and I. Kings 16, 7. 

* Can. Presbyter (14.), ibid. 

^ C. Aurelius episcopus (5.), ibid. 



2IO APPENDIX 

bishop, a presbyter cannot reconcile the excommunicate or public 
penitents. Wherefore it was decided in the second Council of 
Carthage^ ''that chrism or the reconciliation of penitents and the 
consecration of virgins should not be performed by presbyters." 
Also^: ''A presbyter is not permitted to reconcile anyone during 
public Mass." The consecration of virgins, however, can be per- 
formed by a presbyter, if the bishop is consulted. Wherefore in 
the second Council of Carthage^ : "A presbyter should not consecrate 
virgins without consulting the bishop, and he should never admin- 
ister the chrism." As a presbyter can consecrate virgins at the com- 
mand of the bishop, so he can also reconcile penitents. 

VII. Whether we can accept the oblation of the man who on his 
way to penance is prevented by death. 

And if we are asked whether we are to receive the oblation of 
a man who when hastening to penance cannot find a priest, and so 
departs this life; we say, that we are to receive it. Wherefore in the 
canons of the Council of Apanea* : "If anyone die, who has not con- 
fessed, but has a good report and could not reach the priest but was 
overcome by death in his home or on the way, let his kinsfolk make 
his oblation for him at the altar, and let them give money to redeem 
captives." 



^ Can. Si iubet (i.), ibid. 

2 Ibid. 

3 Can. Presbyter inconsulto (2.), ibid. 

^ (Alias Apanensi.) C. Si aliguis (11.), ibid. 



Distinction XXI 

PART I 

■> 

I. Of sins which are remitted ofter this life. 

We are also often asked whether any sins are remitted after this 
life. That some are remitted after this life Christ shows in the Gos- 
pel when he says^ : "Whosoever sins against the holy Spirit, it shall 
not be forgiven him, neither in this world nor in the world to come." 
From which we are to understand, as the holy doctors declare, that 
some sins will be forgiven in the future. "For some sins are par- 
doned in this world, but some little ones are also remitted in the 
future; certainly those which burden sinners after death are for- 
given, if they are worthy, if by good works in this life they have 
deserved to be forgiven." 2 

II. Of those who build gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, 

stubble. 

Of those persons who build "wood, hay, stubble" Augustine^ 
says that they shall find the fire of transitory tribulation burning the 
inflammable structures, which they have carried with them. For 
he says: "Certainly after the death of this body, when souls are 
passing from the fire of purgatory to the day of damnation and 
recompense, during this interval of time the spirits of the dead, who 
built up wood, hay, stubble, are said to endure a sort of fire which 
others who have not carried with them such structures do not feel, 
that they may find the fire of transitory tribulation burning up 
venial offences; I will not deny this statement, because it may be 
true." "But because it is said : 'He will be saved so as by fire,' this 
fire is despised. However this fire will be more severe than anything 
which a man can suffer in this life." * — Here it is clearly indicated 



1 Matt. 12, 32; Lk. 12, 10. 

2 Gregory, IV. Dialog, c. 39 and C. Qualis hinc (4.), d. 25. 

3 Lib. XXI. de Civ. Dei, c. 26. n. 4. (Cf. Enchirid. c. 69. n. 18.) See I. Cor. 
3, 12. 

* Enarrat. in Ps. ;^'j. n. 3. See I. Cor. 3, 15. 

211 



212 APPENDIX 

that those who build wood, hay, stubble carry with them certain 
inflammable structures, that is, venial sins; which are burned up in 
the correcting fire. Wherefore it is established that some venial sins 
are effaced after this life. 

IIL That some persons are more quickly, others more slowly,, 
purged in the fire of purgatory. 

Now some are purged more slowly, others more quickly in this 
purging fire, according as they have loved more or less the things 
which perish. Wherefore Augustine^ : "It is not incredible that after 
this life some of the faithful are saved through a certain purging fire 
more quickly or more slowly according as they have loved more or 
less the good things that perish." 

IV. What it means to build wood, hay, stubble. 

Therefore the Apostle did not idly distinguish the three, 
"wood, hay, stubble," which those men build who, even if they do 
not steal others' goods, nevertheless cleave with a kind of love to 
things which are a concession to weakness; and, according to their 
degrees of loving them they will endure the fire either longer as 
wood, or less as hay, or least as stubble. But those who build "gold, 
silver, and precious stone" are safe from both fires, not only from the 
eternal, which will torture the impious forever, but also from that 
correcting fire, by which some persons who are to be saved, will be 
purged." 2 

Here someone may object: if by wood, hay, stubble, venial sins 
are to be understood, and no one is so perfect as not to sin venially : 
then those who build gold, silver and precious stone, build also wood, 
hay, stubble : therefore they will pass through the fire. — To this we 
say that not everyone who sins venially, builds wood, hay, stubble; 
just as on the contrary, not every one who contemplates God, and 
loves his neighbor and does good works, builds gold, silver, and 
precious stone. And yet by "gold" is understood the contemplation 
of God, by "silver" the love of one's neighbor, by the "precious 
stone" good works. But those who build "wood, hay, stubble," con- 



^ Enchirid. c. 69. n. 18. 

* This and what follows is gathered from several passages of Augustine as 
Enarrat. in Ps. 80. n. 21; in Ps, 37. n. 3; de Fide et operibus c. 15. 16. 



DISTINCTION XXI 213 

template God, and love their neighbor, and do good works, but they 
do not build ''gold, silver, and precious stone." 

V. What it is to build gold, silver, precious stones. 

For he builds these, who does these three so that he thinks the 
thoughts that are God's and how he may please God, not the world. 
■"But by 'wood and hay and stubble' we may understand worldly 
things, although those that are lawfully allowed, such lusts as cannot 
be given up without grief of soul." ^ Therefore he who thinks the 
thoughts of the world and how he may please the world, builds 
these, "he is bound by some carnal love for his riches, and yet does 
much good with his wealth, and does not commit any fraud or 
rapine for it." ^ — From these quotations, then, it is clear that the 
same man does not build the one and the other at the same time. For 
one building is only done by the perfect who do not think of pleasing 
the world, but only of pleasing God ; and even if they sometimes sin 
venially, their sin is consumed within them by the fervor of charity^ 
as a drop of water in a fiery furnace ; and therefore they never carry 
with them what can be burned. But the other worse building is the 
work of lesser men, who think to please not only God, but also the 
world, yet prefer God. For if they preferred the world, they would 
not build but destroy the foundation. Therefore their carnal affec- 
tions through which they are devoted, their homes, wives and pos- 
sessions, yet so that they prefer nothing to Christ, are signified by 
those three wood, hay, stubble ; which do not enter the minds of the 
perfect, even if they admit other venial sins; but sometimes they 
last in the hearts of the lesser men to the end and they die with 
these structures, are but parted from them in the fire; they will be 
saved by the merit of their foundation and yet will feel the severest 
punishment. From this it appears how great is the "mercy" which 
God shows here and how great is the "truth" which he maintains 
there, since he punishes the same sin much more severely there than 
here.^ 



* August., Enchirid. c. 68. n. i8. 

2 August., de Fide et operibus c. i6. n. 27. 

3 Cf. Gregory, II. Homil. in Evang., homil. 33. n. 4 and XVI. Moral, c. 67. 
n. 81. 

«Ps. 84, II. 



214 APPENDIX 

VI. That one may do penance truly for one venial sin, even if not 

for every one. 

But perhaps you will say that we must understand this saying- 
of the punishment of sin, not of the sin itself, because Gregory^ says 
that some light offences are remitted in the future. For if a man 
does true penance, all his sins are forgiven him, but perhaps the pun- 
ishment remains ; therefore if he die truly penitent, he departs with- 
out sin; but if he is not truly penitent in death, he carries a stain 
which will never be effaced. But he who builds up wood, hay, 
stubble does penance truly, because he is good and has charity and 
departs this life in charity: therefore he departs without sin. — 
It does not follow: it is indeed true, that he is good, and has 
charity, and does penance truly; and yet he departs with venial 
sin, which penance has not effaced. For penance effaces only 
the sin which a man abandons. But this kind of sin is often 
not abandoned by a man in this life, and yet he is truly penitent, 
even though he does not do penance for all his venial sins. For a 
man can do penance for every mortal, and for every venial sin, 
except one or more venial sins ; just as a man may have charity, and 
one or more venial sins, but this cannot in any way be possible with 
criminal offences. For there may be a good man who has charity 
but loves the things of this world with a sort of affectionate desire; 
and while he is in this state, he is overcome by sudden death; he is 
dead in his worldly affection, and yet he will be saved, though he did 
not free himself from it here: therefore after this life he will be 
purged from it. So it is evident that some sins, that is trivial ones, 
are remitted after this life. But if our authors had wished this say- 
ing to be understood of the punishment of sin, why did they mention 
trivial rather than grievous ones, when the punishment of grievous 
ones, which has not been completed here, continues after this life. 

PART II 

VII. What general confession is. 

Next we must consider what profit there is in that confession 
where the particular sins which one has done, are not enumerated. — 
We can say rightly, that all criminal offences ought to be men- 
tioned at least once in confession, unless some have escaped the mind. 

1 Lib. IV. Dialog, c. 39. Cf. n. 2. p. 8. 



DISTINCTION XXI 215 

But because no one knows all his sins, confess generally at least those 
which you do not remember, and then you will not have concealed 
any of your sins. But it is sufficient to confess generally, venial sins^ 
because they are innumerable, unless some are frequently repeated ; 
nevertheless it is more perfect to state these also if you can. There- 
fore general confesson is made daily in the Church for the venial 
sins which we commit daily, and for those mortal sins of which we 
have no knowledge. Wherefore Augustine^ : ''The penitent speaks 
the truth to God, when he conceals from him none of the sins he has 
committed; not that God would be ignorant of them, even if the 
penitent concealed them deliberately, but God wishes the penitent to 
tell him the truth, so that he may obtain pardon. But if any sins 
escape his mind, he confesses the truth to God when he says gen- 
erally: 'O God, who knowest the secrets of the heart, and from 
whom my deeds and sins are not hid,' for them I pray that thou 
wouldst grant pardon. And this is the truth of confession which 
God loves." Wherefore : "For behold thou hast loved truth." — Here 
it is implied that general confession effaces even the mortal sins, of 
which we have no knowledge. 

VIII. That no one ought to confess sins, which he has not done. 

But as the penitent ought not conceal his sin, because that is 
pride; so he ought not for the sake of humility confess himself 
guilty of what he knows he has not committed, because such humility 
is dangerous, and makes him a sinner. Wherefore Augustine^: 
"When you lie for the sake of humility, if you were not a sinner 
before you lied, by lying you have done what you tried to avoid. The 
truth is not in you, unless you call yourself a sinner just in so far 
as you know you are. It is the truth itself, that you call yourself 
what you are. For how is there truth where falsehood rules ?" 

IX. Of the punishment of the priest who publishes the sins of one 

who has confessed. 

"But let the priest take care lest he betray to others the sins of 



* Lib. V. Hypognost. (among Augustine's works) c. i. n. i. See Ps. 68, 6 
and below Ps. 50, 8. 

2 Sermo 181. (alias 29. de Verbis Apost.) c. 4. n. 5; C. Cum humilitatis (9.),. 
C. 22. q. 2. 



2i6 APPENDIX 

those who confessed, otherwise let him be deposed. Wherefore Greg- 
ory: "Let a priest above all take care not to repeat to anyone the 
sins which are confessed to him, neither to relatives nor to strangers ; 
nor, Heaven forbid, for the sake of a scandal. For if he do this 
lie should be deposed, and pass all the days of his life wandering 
about branded with shame." ^ "But the saying,^ that a penitent 
should choose a priest who knows how to bind and loose, seems to 
he contrary to the directions in the canons, namely, that no one 
should presume to judge another's parishioner. But it is one thing 
to scorn one's own priest from prejudice or hatred, as the canons 
forbid, and another to avoid a blind priest, which Urban warns us to 
do, lest 'if the blind lead the blind, both fall into the pit.' " For 
Urban II says : "We have determined that no priest hereafter should 
he allowed to receive for penance anyone committed to another 
priest, without the consent of the priest to whom he had previously 
committed himself, except on account of the ignorance of the priest 
to whom he had previously confessed. And a priest who tries to act 
contrary to this rule, will be in danger of losing his office." 



* So in C. Sacerdos ante (2.), de Poenitent. d. 6. Not found in Gregory. 
2 Dist. XVII. c. 4. — From Gratian, can. cit. See Matt. 15, 14. The words 
of Urban follow there in the next C. 



Distinction XXII 

I. Whether pardoned sins return. 

And since it has been asserted above^ by many authorities, that 
sins are pardoned through true contrition of the heart before 
the confession of the mouth, or satisfaction of deeds, even to a 
man who has at some time relapsed into sin; we are asked, 
whether if after contrition of heart the man scorns to confess 
or falls into the same sin or a like one, his pardoned sins may 
return. The solution of this problem is obscure and perplexing, 
since some assert, but others on the contrary deny, that sins once 
pardoned are again recalled for punishment. But those who say 
that pardoned sins return, support their position by the following 
testimonies. Ambrose says^r "Pardon each other, if a man sins 
against another ; otherwise God recalls your pardoned sins. For if he 
is despised in these ways he will without doubt recall the sentence by 
which he granted mercy, as we read in the Gospel of the wicked 
servant, who was found unmerciful to his fellow-servant." Also 
Rabanus^ : "God gave the wicked servant to the torturers, until he 
should pay all his debt ; because not only the sins which a man did 
after baptism will be accounted unto him for punishment, but even 
the original sins which were forgiven him in baptism." Also Greg- 
ory*: "From these words of the Gospel it is evident that if we do 
not forgive from our whole heart the transgression committed against 
us, the offence will be held against us again, which we rejoiced 
to think was forgiven us through penance." Likewise Augustine^ : 
"God says: 'Forgive and it shall be forgiven thee'; but I first 
forgave, do thou forgive afterwards. For if thou dost not for- 
give I will recall thee, and I will turn back upon thee whatever 



1 Dist. XVII. c. I. and XIV. c. ult. 

2 In Epist. ad Ephes. 4, 32 ; cf. Hugh of St. Victor, II. de Sacram. p. XIV. c. 9. 
See Matt. 18, 33. 

3 s{ ludas (i), de Poenitent. d. 4. § i. 

* Lib. IV. Dialog, c. 60; C. Constat ex dictis (2.), ibid. 

5 Serm. 83. (alias 15. de Verbis Dom.) c. 6. n. 7; C. Dixit Dominus (3.), 
ibid. See Luke 6, 37. 

217 



2i8 APPENDIX 

I forgave." Also^ : "The man who, unmindful of divine benefits^ 
wishes to avenge his own injuries, not only shall not deserve 
pardon for his future sins, but shall have the past ones, which 
he believed were already forgiven him, turned back upon him 
for punishment." Also Bede^ : " *I will return into my house,' etc. : 
This verse must be feared, not explained, lest the sin which we be- 
lieved extinguished in us, should because of our negligence oppress 
us when we are idle." Also^ : "For whatever lays hold of us after 
baptism, whether heretical error or worldly desire, will quickly cast 
us down to the depths of all wickedness." Also Augustine* : "That 
pardoned sins return where there is no brotherly love, the Lord 
teaches clearly in the Gospel in the parable of the servant from whom 
his lord demanded the debt, which had been remitted, because he 
would not forgive his fellow-servant his debt." — They depend on 
these authorities who say that pardoned sins, if repeated, simply re- 
turn. — To them we may object: if anyone, for the sin of which he 
has repented and received indulgence, is punished again, it does 
not seem just. If he is punished for a sin which he sinned and did 
not amend, the justice is clear; but if what was pardoned is again 
called to account, it is either injustice, or hidden justice. For God 
seems 'to judge the same thing twice,' and 'double affliction to 
arise' ^ ; and this the Scripture denies. — But to this argument we can 
reply that double tribulation does not arise, nor does God judge the 
same thing twice. For this would be the case, if after worthy satis- 
faction and sufficient punishment God should again punish, but the 
man has not made satisfaction worthily and sufficiently, if he has not 
persevered. For he ought to keep a perpetual memory of his sin, 
not in order to commit it, but in order to avoid it ; he ought not to 
forget all the retributions of God which are as many as his remis- 
sions of sins: so he ought to consider that the gifts of God are as 
many as his afflictions, and to give thanks for them to the end. But 



* C. Qui divini (4.), ibid.; Aug. Serm. 83. ibid. 

* Lib. IV. in Evang. Luc. 11, 24; C. Revertar in domum (5.), ibid. 
3 Ibid. v. 26; C. Quaecumque enim (6.), ibid. 

* Lib. I. de Baptismo contra Donatistas, c. 12. n. 20; C. Quomodo exaudit 
(41.), de Cons. d. 4. 

* Nahum i, 9; cf. Dist. XV. c. i. For the following, cf. Aug., Enarrat. in 
Ps. 102. n. 3. 4. See Ps. 102, 2 and II. Pet. 2, 22, 



DISTINCTION XXII 219 

because the ungrateful man has returned to his vomit, like a dog, he 
has killed the good things which he did before, and has recalled 
the remitted sin, so that God who had before forgiven his sin when 
he was humbled, may impute it afterwards when he is lofty and 
ungrateful. 

But because it seems inconsistent that pardoned sins should be 
imputed again, some^ persons hold that no one is punished again by 
God for sins once pardoned; but for this reason pardoned sins are 
said to return and be imputed, because on account of ingratitude the 
man becomes as guilty and as much a sinner as he was before. For 
thus the sin that had been pardoned is said to be brought to account, 
because the man is ungrateful for the remission he received, and be- 
comes as guilty as he was before. — Both answers to the question are 
supported by the approved doctors ; therefore I pass no sentence in 
favor of either, but leave the judgment to the studious reader, adding 
that it will be safe for me and close to salvation to eat the crumbs 
under the tables of the lords. ^ 

II. What the sacrament is, and what the thing. 

After the foregoing, it remains to inquire what the sacrament 
is, and what the thing, in the act of penance. For a sacrament is the 
sign of a sacred thing; what therefore is the sign here? — Some 
say, as Grandulph, that the sacrament here is what is done outwardly 
only, that is, the outer penance, which is the sign of the inner pen- 
ance, that is, of contrition of the heart and humility. — If this be so, 
not every sacrament of the gospel accomplishes that which it figures ; 
for the outward penance does not effect the inward; rather the 
inward is the cause of the outward. But to this argument they reply 
that this rule must be understood of those sacraments which were 
instituted in the New Testament ; that is, the sacraments of baptism, 
confirmation and of the body of Christ. But the sacrament of pen- 
ance, as also that of marriage, existed before the time of grace, even 
from the beginning of the human race.^ For both were instituted 
for our first parents. — Also, if outer penance is the sacrament, and 
inner the thing of the sacrament, the thing more often precedes the 



1 As Sum. Sent. tr. 6. c. 13. 

2 Matt. 15, 27. 

3 Gen. 2, 22 (marriage), Gen. 3, 18 ff. (penance.) 



220 APPENDIX 

sacrament, than the sacrament the thing. — But not even this is incon- 
sistent. For it often happens also in other sacraments which accom- 
pHsh what they figure. 

But some say that both outer penance and inner are the sacra- 
ment, not two sacraments, but one, as the forms of bread and wine 
are not two sacraments, but one. And as in the sacrament of the 
body, so also in this sacrament they say that one is the sacrament 
only, that is, outer penance; another the sacrament and the thing, 
that is, inner penance ; another the thing and not the sacrament, 
that is, the remission of sins. For inner penance is both the thing 
of the sacrament, namely, of outer penance, and the sacrament 
of the remission of sin, which it signifies and accomplishes. Outer 
penance is both the sign of the inner and of the remission of sins. 



Distinction XXIII 

I. Of the sacrament of extreme unction, 

"Beside the preceding, there is also another sacrament, that is, 
the unction of the sick, which is administered at the end of life, 
with oil consecrated by the bishop." ^ "And there are three kinds of 
unction." 

II. Of the three kinds of unction. 

"For there is the unction, which is performed with the chrism, 
which is called the principal unction, because through it especially 
the Paraclete is given. Wherefore also on account of the abundance 
of grace it contains two liquids mixed, namely, oil and balsam, the 
oil of conscience, the balsam of good report. And it is called 
'Chrism'2 in Greek, 'unction' in Latin. But not all oil sanctified for 
unction is called chrism, but only that which is mixed with balsam, 
with which the heads of kings and bishops are anointed, and with 
which the priest anoints the baptized on the head, and the bishop 
anoints those who are to be confirmed on the brow with the laying 
on of hands. And there is another unction with which catechumens 
and neophytes are anointed on the breast and between the shoulders, 
when they receive baptism. But the third unction is that which is 
called the oil of the sick ; and of this we will now treat." 

III. By whom this sacrament was instituted. 

"This sacrament of the unction of the sick is said to have been 
instituted by the apostles. For James says^ : *Is any sick among 
you? Let him call in the priests of the Church, and let them pray 
over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord, and the 
Lord shall raise him up ; and if he be in sins, they shall be forgiven 
him.* In this passage we are shown that the sacrament was insti- 



1 Sum. Sent. tr. 6. c. 15. The following quotation and all of c. II. is from 
Hugh of St. Victor, II. de Sacram. p. XV. c. i ; c. III. is ibid. c. 2. 
* Greek, ■xp^viw.. 

3 James 5, 14. 15. Following passage is also from Sum. Sent. tr. 6. c. 15. 

221 



222 APPENDIX 

tuted for a double purpose, namely for the remission of sins, and for 
the relief of bodily infirmity. Wherefore it is plain that he who 
receives this unction faithfully and devoutly, is relieved both in body 
and in soul, provided it is expedient that he be relieved in both. But 
if perhaps it is not expedient for him to have bodily health, he 
acquires in this sacrament that health which is of the soul." "And 
as in the other sacraments, so also in this, the 'sacrament' is one 
thing, and the 'thing of the sacrament' another. The 'sacrament' is 
the outer unction itself, the 'thing of the sacrament' the inner unction, 
which is accomplished by the remission of sins and the increase of 
virtues. And if this sacrament is omitted from contempt or neglect, 
it is dangerous and damnable." 

IV. Of the repetition of this sacrament. 

Some persons ask whether this sacrament can be repeated, since 
baptism and some other sacraments when once received are not to 
be repeated. Augustine says,^ "The sacrament must not be repeated, 
and injury must not be done to the sacrament"; but he says this 
where he treats of the sacrament of baptism, of confirmation and of 
ordination. Wherefore it does not seem that this rule is to be 
accepted generally, but only for the sacraments of baptism, of con- 
firmation and of ordination, which must never be repeated, because 
baptism, confirmation and ordination are given once for all and not 
more frequently. But the sacraments of the altar, and of penance 
and of marriage are evidently often repeated ; for the sacrament of 
the body is often received, penance is frequently done, marriage is 
repeatedly contracted. Why therefore cannot unction be similarly 
repeated? If the disease does not return, the medicine is not to be 
repeated ; but if the disease cannot be checked, why ought the medi- 
cine be prohibited? Even as prayer can be repeated, so it seems 
unction can also be repeated; for James in that passage men- 
tions both, and both work together to bring relief of body and 
soul. Why therefore do some persons deny that unction can be 
repeated on one who is sick, in order to obtain again the health of 
mind and body, when the same prayer may be often repeated for 
the same infirmity ?2 — But some wish it understood that the whole 

^ Lib. II. contra Epist. Parmenian. c. 13. n. 28. The preceding proposition 
is also from Hugh, II. de Sacram. loc. cit. c. 3. 
2 Hugh, II. de Sacram. p. XIV. c. 3. 



DISTINCTION XXIII 223 

sacrament should not be repeated, namely everything which belongs 
to the sacrament, saying that some sacraments can be often received, 
but some not ; and that those which are often received, are not com- 
pletely repeated, as the sacrament of the altar and of unction; for 
although they are often received, yet because the same host is not 
blessed again, nor the same oil, the sacrament is not repeated with 
injury.— But someone will say: "in this sense baptism also is not 
repeated, even if one is frequently baptized, since the same water is 
not blessed again." — *'But it is one thing," they say, the blessing 
of the water, by which baptism is conferred, another the blessing of 
the bread and oil. For baptism can be celebrated even in unblessed 
water, because the blessing is only for reverence and decorum, not 
for the virtue of the sacrament. But the body of Christ cannot be 
made, except of consecrated bread; nor can unction be performed, 
except with oil consecrated by the bishop ; and therefore this sancti- 
fication seems to be a part of the virtue of the sacrament. In mar- 
riage also, a man is blessed only once, not oftener. — "For he is 
blessed," as Ambrose says,^ "with his first and not with his second 
wife. If therefore when you say that a sacrament must not be 
repeated, nor injury done it, you apply the meaning of the term to 
the sanctification of the *thing' by which the sacrament is completed, 
the rule is generally true of every sacrament. But if you apply it 
to the receiving of the 'sacrament,* it is true of some that they are not 
repeated or frequently received, but it is not true of others, because 
they are frequently received like this sacrament of unction, which is 
often repeated in almost every Church. 



1 In I. Cor. 7, 44. (among his works), and I. Tim. 5, 3. 



Distinction XXIV 

PART I 

I. Of ecclesiastical orders, how many they are. 

Now we come to the consideration of holy ordination. There 
are seven grades or orders of spiritual office, as is clearly taught us 
in the words of the holy Fathers, and as is shown by the example 
of our head, that is Jesus Christ, who performed in his own person 
the duties of them all, and left the same orders to be observed in his 
body which is the Church. 

II. Why there are seven. 

And there are seven on account of the sevenfold grace of the 
holy Spirit, and those who do not participate in this grace, enter the 
ecclesiastical grades unworthily. But when men in whose minds the 
seven- fold grace of the holy Spirit is diffused, enter the ecclesiastical 
orders, they are believed to receive a fuller grace in the very promo- 
tion to the spiritual rank. 

III. What kind of men are to be taken into the clergy. 

"And such clergy are to be elected to the spiritual ministry, as 
can worthily perform the Lord's sacraments. For it is better for the 
Lord to have few ministers who can worthily do the work of God, 
than many useless ones, who bring a heavy burden on him who 
ordained them." ^ For it is fitting that such be ministers of Christ 
as are adorned with the sevenfold grace of the holy Spirit; from 
whose doctrine and form of conversation the same grace may be 
transmitted to others, lest they trample the celestial pearls of spirit- 
ual words and divine ministrations under the feet of a vile life. Now 
in the sacrament of the sevenfold Spirit there are seven ecclesias- 
tical ranks, that is: door-keepers, readers, exorcists, acolytes, sub- 
deacons, deacons, priests ; but all are called clergy, that is, chosen. 



1 Can. Tales ad ministerium (4.), d. 23. What preceded and much that 
follows is taken from Hugh of St. Victor, II. de Sacram. p. Ill, c. 5. See Matt. 
7.6. 

224 



DISTINCTION XXIV 225 

IV. Of the crown and tonsure. 

'Tor the crown is the sign, by which they are marked for a 
share in the lot of the divine ministry. The crown signifies royal 
dignity, because to serve God is to rule. Wherefore the ministers of 
the Church ought to be kings, so that they may rule themselves and 
others, for Peter says to them : 'You are an elect race, a royal priest- 
hood,' etc. The crown of their heads is left uncovered from above, 
so that their minds may be shown to be free to the Lord, as they 
contemplate 'the glory of God with face uncovered.' For the crown 
of the head is the summit of the mind ; the baring of the head is the 
uncovering of the mind." ^ "For the cleric ought not be ignorant 
of the secrets of God. And their hair is shaven for the uncovering 
of their senses, that is, of the eyes and ears," so that they may be 
taught that the sins which grow in heart and deed must be cut off, 
lest the mind be hindered from hearing and understanding the word 
of God, for the observance of which a crown shall be given on high. 
"Now ecclesiastical tonsure seems to have originated with the Naz- 
arites, who first saved their hair, then shaved their heads for con- 
tinence of life, and placed their hair in the fire of sacrifice. Hence 
the custom became established, that those who were devoted to divine 
worship like the Nazarites, that is, holy men, should be seen with 
shorn hair, as was said to Ezekiel : 'Thou son of man, take a sharp 
knife and cause it to pass upon thy head and beard." In the Acts of 
the Apostles also, we read that Priscilla and Aquila did this; Paul 
also and certain other disciples of Christ did it." ^ Therefore men 
appointed to any rank are rightly called clergy, and Isidore explains^ 
their names and the meanings of their names, thus : "We believe that 
clergy and cleric are so called from the fact that Matthew was elected 
by lot, and he, as we read was the first man ordained by the Apostles. 
For 'cleros' in Greek, in Latin is lot or inheritance. Therefore they 
are called 'clergy' because they are of the lot of the Lord, or because 
they have God as their inheritance. But in general all who serve 



1 Hugh, loc. cit. c. I. See I. Peter 2, 9; II. Cor. 3, 18. Following passage, 
ibid. c. 2. 

2 Ibid. c. 3. (Cf. Isidore, II. de Ecclesiast. offic. c. 4). See Numbers 6, 18; 
Ezek. 5, i; Acts 18, 18 and 21, 24. 

3 Lib. VII. Etymolog. c. 12. n. i. f.; C. Cleros (i.), d. 21; cf. Aug., Enarrat. 
in Ps. 67. n. 19. 



226 APPENDIX 

in the Church are called clergy; their grades and names are: door- 
keeper, reader," etc. 

PART II 

V. Of the door-keepers. 

Door-keepers and janitors are the same as those who in the 
Old Testament^ were elected to guard the temple, so that no unclean 
person should enter it ; and they are called door-keepers because they 
are set over the doors of the temple. For they keep the key, and 
guard all things within and without, and passing judgment upon good 
and evil, they receive the worthy and expel the unworthy. Where- 
fore when they are ordained the keys of the Church are given them 
by the bishop, and he says to them : "So act as men about to render 
an account to God for the things which are unlocked by these keys." ^ 
— The Lord fulfilled this office in his own person when with a 
scourge of cords, he cast out of the temple those that bought and 
sold.^ For he signified that he was a door-keeper, when he said : 
"I am the door, by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and 
shall come in, and go out, and shall find pasture." * 

VI. The readers. 

The second is the grade of readers : "The readers are so called 
from reading as the psalmists from singing psalms. For they deliver 
to the people what they should obey ; they sing and excite the souls 
of their hearers to compunction ; although some readers pronounce 
so miserably, that they drive persons to mourning and lamentation. 
They are also called 'proclaimers,' for they proclaim far ahead, and 
their voice is so clear, that it reaches even the ears of men placed far 
away." ^ "But it is the duty of the reader to read the lessons and 
to declare to the people what the Prophets foretold," ^ so that he 



1 1. Paralis. (Chron.) 23, 5. What follows is from Isidore, VII. Etymolog. 
c. 12. n. 32, and II. de Ecclesiast. Offic. c. 15; C. Cleros § 19. On the functions 
of the clergy, see Isidore, Ep. ad Ludif redum, or Hugh, loc. cit. c. 6. flf. ; cf . also 
Rabanus, IV. de Universo, c. 5. 

2 Can. Ostiarius (19.), d. 23. 

3 John 2, 15. 

4 John ID, 9. 

5 Isidore, VII. Etymolog. c. 12. n. 24; C. cit. Cleros, § 15; Hugh, loc. cit. 
c. 7, 

8 Can. Perlectis (i.), d. 25. §5. — Following passage from Hugh, loc. cit.; 

C. Lector (18.), d. 23. — See Luke 4, 18; Isaiah 58, i. 



DISTINCTION XXIV 227 

reads in Church, by virtue of his office, the prophecies and lessons. 
"Wherefore also, in the sight of the people, the volume of the divine 
lessons is handed him by the bishop, who says: *Take this, and be 
thou a reader of the word of God ; and thou wilt have, if thou faith- 
fully fulfill this office, a part with those who have ministered well the 
word of God.' He who is promoted to this rank, ought to be 
instructed in the knowledge of letters, so that he may understand 
the sense of the words, may know the force of the accents, may read 
distinctly, lest by confusion in pronouncing he lead astray the minds 
of his readers. Let him note what is to be read as a statement, what 
as a question, and where a pause is to be made in his reading. For 
when these points are not observed, they interfere with understand- 
ing, and provoke some to laughter. The voice of the reader should 
aim to reach both the ears and the heart. — This office Christ fulfilled 
when in the midst of the elders, he opened the book of Isaiah and 
read distinctly and intelligibly : *The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,' 
etc. Thereby readers may perceive that they who announce the 
word of God to others, ought to shine with spiritual grace. The 
order seems to have taken its form and beginning from the prophets ; 
for it was said to them : 'Cry aloud, cease not, lift up your voice like a 
trumpet.' " 

VII. Of the Exorcists, 

The third is the order of exorcists. "Now exorcists in Greek, 
are called adjurers or declaimers in Latin ; for they invoke the name 
of the Lord on catechumens and on those who have an unclean spirit, 
adjuring it in his name to go out of them." ^ "It is the duty of an 
exorcist to remember his exorcisms and to lay his hands on demoni- 
acs and catechumens in exorcizing," and he who commands the un- 
clean spirits ought to have a clean spirit and ought to expel the evil 
spirit from his heart, when he expels it from the body of another, lest 
the medicine which he makes for another should not benefit himself 
and a man should say to him : "Physician, heal thyself." ^ When 



^Isidore, loc. cit. n. 31; C. Cleros (i.), d. 21. §18. — Following passage, 
C. Perlectis (i.), d. 25. § 2; Hugh, loc. cit. c. 8. 

2 Luke 4, 23. The following passage is C. Exorcista (17.), d. 23; the third, 
Hugh, loc. cit. c. 8. (See Mark 7, 34; Matt. 8, 16; Lk. 8, 33); fourth, Gratian, 
introduction to d. 21. (See Matt. 12, 27.) 



228 APPENDIX 

exorcists are ordained, they receive the book of exorcisms from the 
hand of the bishop, and he says to them : "Take this and have power 
of laying hands on demoniacs or catechumens." — "The Lord per- 
formed this office when he touched the ears and tongue of the deaf- 
mute with saliva and said: 'Epheta,' that is 'be opened,' teaching 
hereby that we ought to open spiritually the ears of the hearts of men 
to understand, and their mouths to confess, that they may receive the 
holy Spirit their surety, and the demon may be cast out. Christ 
also fulfilled this office when he healed many demoniacs, "This 
order seems to have descended from Solomon, who found a way 
of exorcizing, by which demons were adjured and expelled from 
the bodies which they possessed; men dedicated to this office are 
called exorcists. Christ says of them in the Gospel: *If I cast out 
demons by Beelzebub, by whom do your sons,' that is, the exorcists, 
'cast them out?'" 

VIII. Of the acolytes. 

In the fourth place come the acolytes. "But acolytes in Greek, 
are called in Latin candle-bearers, from the carrying of candles when 
the Gospel is to be read or the sacrifice to be offered. For then the 
lights are lighted, and carried by them ; not to drive away the dark- 
ness, because the sun at that time is bright, but to show a sign of 
joy; so that under the type of corporeal light, the light might be dis- 
played, of which it is said: *He was the true light, which lighteth 
every man coming into this world.' " ^ "To the acolyte falls the 
preparation of the lights in the sacristy; he carries the candle, he 
prepares for the sub-deacons the cruet with the wine and the water 
mixed, for the Eucharist." "When acolytes are ordained, while they 
are instructed by the bishop how they ought to act in their office, 
they receive from the archdeacon a candlestick with a candle, and an 
empty cruet. — The Lord testified that he held this office when he 
said : T am the light of the world ; whoever follows me shall not walk 
in darkness.' " Those who in the Old Testament^ arranged the 
lamps in the candlestick and lighted them with celestial fire to illu- 
minate the northern darkness, possessed the form of this office. 



^ Isidore, loc. cit. n. 29; C. cit. Cleros, § 17. See John i, 9. Following pas- 
sage is C. Perlectis, supra cit., § 3; third is Hugh, loc. cit. c. 9; see John 8, 12. 
2 Exod. 25, 6; Levit. 6, 12. 



DISTINCTION XXIV 229 

IX. Of the sub-deacons. 

The fifth is the. order of sub-deacons. "In Greek they are called 
hypodiacones, whom we call sub-deacons ; they are so called, because 
they are subordinate to the commands and duties of the Levites. For 
they receive in the temple the oblations of the faithful and bring 
them to the Levites to be placed on the altars. They were called 
among the Hebrews the Nathinaei," "that is, those who serve the 
Lord in humility." ^ "It is the duty of a sub-deacon to bring the 
chalice and paten to the altar of Christ, and to hand them to the 
Levites and to minister to them, and also to hold the cruet and the 
basin and the napkin for the bishop and the priests and the Levites 
and to ofifer them water to wash their hands before the altar." 2 
The law of continence is imposed on them, because they approach 
the altar, and carry the vessels with the body and blood of Christ; 
wherefore they ought to fulfill the saying of Isaiah: "Be ye clean 
who bear the vessels of the Lord." ^ "It is also their duty to place 
as much of the oblations on the altar as may suffice for the people, 
and to wash the corporal-cloths and the palls and altar-cloths." 
"When they are ordained, they receive from the hand of the bishop 
a paten and empty chalice, and from the archdeacon a cruet with a 
basin and a napkin. — Christ held this office, when he girded himself 
with a towel and pouring water into a basin, washed the feet of the 
disciples, and wiped them with a towel." 

X. Of the deacons. 

"The order of deacons holds the sixth place on account of the 
perfection of the number six. This order in the old Testament 
received or took its name from the tribe of Levi; for they are also 
called Levites. For the Lord commanded Moses, that after the 
ordination of Aaron and his sons the tribe of Levi should straight- 
way be ordained and consecrated to the Lord for the ministry of 
the divine worship, and that it should serve for Israel in the presence 
of Aaron and his sons in the tabernacle, and that they should bear 



* Isidore, loc. cit. n. 23; C. Cleros, § 14; but the last words are from Hugh, 
loc. cit. c. 10. (See Acts 20, 19, and II. Esdras. 3. 26.) 

2 Isidore, Ep. cit. ad Ludifredum; C. cit. Perlectis, § 6. 

3 Isaiah 52, 11. — The following passage is Hugh, loc. cit. c, 10, and C. Sub- 
diaconus (15.), d. 23. See John 13, 5. 



230 APPENDIX 

the ark and the tabernacle and all its vessels and should sleep round 
about the tabernacle, and when the tabernacle must be moved they 
should take it down and set it up again. They were commanded to 
serve in the tabernacle from twenty years of age and upward and 
this rule was followed by the holy Fathers under the New Testament, 
because that age is robust to bear burdens." ^ "The Levites there- 
fore are called from the name of their founder; for the Levites 
sprang from Levi, and by them the mysteries of the mystic sacrament 
were performed in the temple. They are called diaconi in Greek and 
in Latin ministers, because, as consecration is a function of the priest, 
so the service of the mystery is that of the deacon." ^ "It is the duty 
of a deacon to assist the priests, and to minister in all the acts which 
are performed in the sacraments of Christ, that is, in baptism, in 
chrism, with the paten and chalice, and also carry the oblations 
and place them on the altar, also to arrange the table of the Lord 
and to cover it, to carry the cross, and to read the Gospel and Epistle 
to the people. For as the readers are commanded to read the Old 
Testament, so the deacons to read the New. The office of the prayers 
is also his duty, and the recitation of the names of catechumens. 
He admonishes them to give ear to the Lord, he gives the peace and 
he announces it." And the statute of Moses for this order is 
also represented under the New Testament, when a stole is laid 
on the left shoulder of a deacon, and his chasuble is folded upon 
the days of fasting ; because whatever toil and endurance are suffered 
in this life, are, as it were, borne on the left side, while on the right, 
that is, in eternity, rest is found. This order was celebrated by the 
Apostles, when, as we road in the Acts of the Apostles^, they chose 
'seven men full of the holy Spirit' for the office, and when prayers 
were offered, they laid hands on them. Wherefore also the custom 
became established that in every mother Church seven deacons 
should stand around the altar of Christ like seven columns. They 
are the seven angels blowing trumpets in the Apocalypse, who ought 
to be men like those the Apostle described when he wrote to Tim- 



* Hugh, loc. cit. c. ii; cf. Isidore, II. de Ecclesiast. Officiis, c. 8; see Num- 
bers 3, 6. lo and 4, 5; 8, 24. 

2 Isidore, VII. Etymolog. c. 12. n. 22; C. Cleros, § 13. The following place 
is C. PerlecHs, op. cit. § 7; and what follows is taken from Hugh, loc. cit. c. 11. 

3 Acts 6, 3. — For the following cf. C. Episcopus Deo (59.). de Cons. d. i. 



DISTINCTION XXIV 231 

othy.i "When they are ordained, the bishop alone lays hands on them, 
because they are devoted to the ministry." He places the orarium, 
that is, the stole, on the left shoulder, that by this they may know 
that they have received the 'gentle yoke of the Lord,'^ by which they 
may make subject to the fear of God the things of the left side. 
They receive also the text of the Gospel that they may know that 
they are heralds of the Gospel of Christ. Likewise before they 
are ordained, they should be tried, as the Apostle teaches,^ and if 
they have no crime, they may minister. — "Christ performed this 
office when after the Feast he distributed the sacrament of his flesh 
and blood to the disciples, and when he roused the sleeping disciples 
to prayer, saying: 'Watch and pray, that ye enter not into tempta- 
tion.' " 

• 
XL Of presbyters. 

The seventh order is that of presbyters. "Presbyter in Greek 
is senior in Latin. They are called presbyters not only because of 
their years or advanced age, but on account of the honor and dignity 
which they receive"*; "for they ought to excel among the people 
by the prudence of their ways and the maturity of their conversa- 
tion, as it is written: 'Old age is venerable, not for its length nor 
for the number of years computed. For it is the thoughts of a man 
that are hoary, and an immaculate life is old age.' " "Presbyters 
are also called priests, because they give what is sacred ; yet, although 
they are priests, they have not the crown of the pontificate as 
bishops have, because they do not sign the forehead with the chrism 
nor give the Paraclete, which functions are shown by a reading of the 
Acts of the Apostles to belong to bishops only." Wherefore also 
among men of old times bishops and presbyters were the same, 
because it is the name of a dignity, not of an age. "The name priest 



1 1. Tim. 3, 8; above, see Apoc. (Rev.) 8, 2. Following passage, C. Diaconus 
(II.), d. 23. 

*Matt. II, 30. 

3 1. Tim. 3, 10. Following passage from Hugh, op. cit.; see Matt. 26, 26, 
and Matt. 26, 41. 

* Isidore, VII. Etymolog. c. 12. n. 20; C. CUros, § 12; the following passage 
is Hugh, ibid. c. 12; see Wisdom 4, 8; third is Isidore and canon, as above; see 
Acts 8, 14. 



232 APPENDIX 

(sacerdos) is composed from the Greek and the Latin, that is sacrum 
dans, or sacer dux. For as a king {rex) is called from ruling 
(regendo), so a priest from sanctifying (sanctificando) ; for he con- 
secrates and sanctifies.^ A priest is also called antistes from the 
fact that he stands before (ante stat), for he is first in the order of 
the Church/' "Moreover the duty of a presbyter is to perform the 
sacrament of the body and blood of the Lord on the altar of God, 
to say prayers and to bless the gifts of God" ; when he is ordained 
he has his hands anointed, that he may know he has received the 
grace of consecrating and that he ought to extend the deeds of 
charity to all. He also receives the stole which falls on both sides, 
because he ought to be protected by the arms of justice against both 
adversity and prosperity. He also receives the chalice with the 
wine and the paten with the host, that he may thereby know he 
receives the power of oflfering "sacrifices acceptable to God." ^ — 
This order had its origin with the sons of Aaron. For God instituted 
high-priests and lesser priests through Moses, who at God's com- 
mand anointed Aaron to be high-priest and his sons lesser priests. 
Christ also first "chose twelve disciples, whom he likewise called 
Apostles" ; whose place is now occupied by the greater bishops in 
the Church. Next he appointed also seventy-two other disciples, 
whose place in the Church is filled by the presbyters. But one among 
the apostles became chief, Peter, whose vicar and successor is the 
Supreme Pontiflf, wherefore he is called "apostolic" and is also 
known as Pope (Papa), that is, father of fathers. And the Apostle, 
when he wrote to Timothy, showed what manner of man ought to 
be elected presbyter ; for there he means presbyter when he uses 
the name of "bishop." — And Christ performed this office when he 
"ofifered himself on the altar of the cross." When he was both 
priest and victim, and when after supper he changed the bread and 
wine into his own body and blood. — Behold, we have spoken 
briefly of the seven grades of the Church, and have mentioned what 
the duty of each is. 



^Rabanus, IV. de Univero. Following passage is from C. Perlectis, op. 
cit. § 8; the rest is from Hugh, op. cit. c. 12. 

' Numbers 5, 8, next Exod. 29, 5; Luke 6, 13; 10, i; Matt. 16, 18; I. Tim. 
3, 2; Heb. 10, II. 



DISTINCTION XXIV 233 

XI I. Which are called holy orders. 

And although all orders are spiritual and holy, yet the canons 
rightly ordain that only two should be called holy orders, namely 
the diaconate and the presbyterate ; because "the primitive church 
is said to have had only these," ^ and we have the command of the 
Apostle for these only. 'Tor the Apostle ordained bishops and 
presbyters in each city" ; we read also that Levites were ordained by 
the Apostles, of whom the greatest was the blessed Stephen ; but the 
Church established subdeacons and acolytes for herself as time 
went on. 

XIII. Why it is called order. 

Now if we are asked what that is which we here call order; we 
can say rightly that it is a sign, that is, something sacred, by which 
spiritual power and office are delivered to one ordained. Therefore 
the spiritual marking when the bestowal of power occurs, is called 
the order or grade. And these orders are called sacraments, because 
in the reception of them, a sacred thing, that is, grace is received, 
which is symbolized by the procedure at that time. 

XIV. Of the names of the dignities or offices. 

And there are other names, not of orders, but of dignities or of 
offices. Bishop is the name both of a dignity and of an office. 

XV. Of the bishop. 

"Now the word episcopate comes from the fact that he who is 
made bishop superintends, that is, has the care of those under him. 
For scopein in Greek is to superintend (intendere) in Latin; episcopi 
in Greek are in Latin overseers (speculatores). For the overseer 
(speculator) is placed over the Church, and is so called from the fact 
that he oversees and watches the customs and life of the people 
under him." 2 

XVI. Of the bishop. 

"The bishop is the head of the priests, -as it were a way for 



1 Can. Nullus in episcopum (4.), d. 60. See I. Tim. op. cit. and Acts 6, 5. 
What follows, Gratian, in the beginning of d. 21. 

2 Isidore, op. cit. n. 11; C. Cleros, § 7. 



234 APPENDIX 

those who follow; and he is also called the 'high-priest.' For he 
makes the Levites and priests, he assigns all the ecclesiastical 
orders." ^ 

XVII. Of the four-fold order of bishops. 

"And the order of bishops is four-fold, that is, patriarchs, arch- 
bishops, metropolitans and bishops. Patriarcha in Greek means the 
chief of the fathers, because the patriarch holds the first, that is the 
apostolic place, like the Roman, the Antiochian, the Alexandrian" ^ ; 
but the chief of all is the Roman. "The archbishop is the head of 
the bishops; for archos in Greek is head (princeps) in Latin. But 
metropolitans are so called from the importance of their cities; for 
they preside over single provinces; and the other priests are subject 
to their authority and doctrine. For the care of the whole province 
is committed to the bishops themselves. And all the orders desig- 
nated above are called bishops." — ^Note, that evidently primates were 
meant above by the name archbishops, and by metropolitans, those 
whom we now call archbishops. "Also the distinction between these 
seems to have been introduced by Gentiles who called some of their 
flamens simply flamens, other archflamens, others chief -flamens." ^ 
"For the priests of the Gentiles were called flamens, because they 
wore on their heads a felt cap, on which there was a short rod, with 
wool upon it, and when they could not wear it for the heat, they 
bound a thread only about their heads. For it was wrong for them 
to take their places with bare heads. Wherefore they are called 
flamens or filamines from the thread (fits) which they wore. But 
on feast-days they laid aside the thread and assumed the cap for the 
dignity of the priesthood. 

XVIII. Of the prophet. 

The seers {vates) were so called from their strength of mind 
{vi mentis), and the significance of their name is manifold; for it 
signifies sometimes priest, sometimes prophet, sometimes poet. 



^ Locis citt. 

2 Can. cit. Cleros, § i. Following passage, Isidore, loc. cit. n. lo, and C. 
cit. § 6. 

3 Gratian, introduction to d. 21. Following passage is Isidore, loc. cit. 
n. 18; C. Cleros, § 11.; and from Isidore, loc. cit. n. 15, and C. cit. § 9. and 16, 
much of what follows in the succeeding chapters, is taken. 



DISTINCTION XXIV 235 

XIX. Of the cantor. 

But the cantor is so called, because he modulates his voice in 
song (cantu). Of cantors there are two kinds: precentor and suc- 
centor; precentor, the one who begins the chant; the succentor the 
one who responds by singing after him; and the concentor is so 
called, because he accompanies another. But he who does not 
accompany another nor sing in concert, will not be a concentor. 

Now that these matters ''have been briefly discussed, the min- 
isters of Christ must be warned that just so far as they excel in the 
dignity of their order, should they excel in sanctity of life, so that the 
people committed to them, taught by their disciplines, may obey them 
gratefully, and may make progress from day to day through imfta- 
tion of them"^ from whom they receive the divine sacraments, and 
hear the solemn words of the masses. — Now "Mass" {Missa) is so 
called, either because the victim is sent (missa), who is com- 
memorated in this office, wherefore we say : "Go, it is sent," that is, 
follow the victim which is sent to heaven, striving after it ; or because 
"the heavenly messenger (missus) comes" to consecrate the Lord's 
body, and by him the victim is borne to the heavenly altar, wherefore 
also we say: "It is sent" 2 (Missa est.) 



* Hugh, loc. cit. c. 12. 

2 Cf. above d. XIII. c. i. about the middle. 



Distinction XXV 

I. Of persons ordained by heretics. 

We are also often asked whether heretics, cut off and condemned 
by the Church, can give holy orders, and whether persons ordained 
by them ought to be reordained when they return to the unity 
of the Church. — The words of the doctors, which seem to disagree 
entirely, make this problem obscure and almost insoluble. — For some 
appear to teach that heretics cannot give holy orders, and that those 
who seem to be ordained by them do not receive grace. For Innocent 
says^ : "It does not seem that the Arian clergy should be received 
with the dignity of any priesthood or ministry," and to them he 
allows only baptism, which is received in the name of the Father, and 
of the Son, and of the holy Spirit. He says also that "they cannot 
give the holy Spirit, whom they have lost" ; and that "those ordained 
by heretics have their heads wounded ; and he who has lost an honor 
cannot bestow the honor, nor can another receive anything, since 
there was nothing in the giver which he could receive." He taught 
also that "only lay communion should be imparted, with the laying 
on of hands, to persons who come over from the heretics, and that 
no one of them should receive even the smallest clerical honor." 
Gregory^ also says that the consecration of the Arians is sacrile- 
gious, when communion is received from their hands. Cyprian^ also 
says that all that heretics do is carnal and worthless and sacrilegious, 
and their "altars are false and unlawful, their priesthoods and sacri- 
fices sacrilegious," and that "like apes, which, since they are not men, 
imitate the human form, they claim the appearance and authority of 
the catholic Church for themselves, although they are not in the 
Church" ; and since they are sacrilegious, they administer their priest- 



* Can. Arianos (73.), C. i. q. i. Following passage is C. Qui perfectionem 
(17.), ibid.; third, C. Ventum est (18.), ibid.; fourth, ibid. § 2. 

2 Lib. III. Dialog, c. 31; C. Superveniente (72.), ibid. 

3 Ep. ad Magnum de baptizandis Novatianis, n. i ; and Gratian on C. 
Manus impositio (74.), ibid, and next Cyprian, Ep. ad lubaianum (de haereticis 
baptizand.) n. 2; both in C. Si quis, inquit (70.), ibid. For the following, cf. 
Cyprian, Ep. ad Magnum, n. 9. flf. 

236 



DISTINCTION XXV 237 

hood and erect their altar, although the oblation cannot be sacrificed 
there, for the holy Spirit is not present ; and the Lord does not bene- 
fit anyone through the prayers and petitions of a person who has 
dishonored the Lord himself. Jerome^ also asserts that "everything 
which is offered by heretics is defiled in the sight of the Lord, be- 
cause although the things seem to be holy in appearance, yet because 
they are touched by someone who is polluted, they are all polluted." 
The same : "God hates the sacrifices of heretics and casts them away 
from him ; and as often as heretics are gathered together in his name, 
he detests their noisomeness, and closes his nostrils." The same: 
"They oflfer sacrilegious bread," etc. Leo also^ declares that, "out- 
side the Church there are no valid priesthoods, nor are there true 
sacrifices." He also says: "The light of all sacrifices was extin- 
guished in the Alexandrian see by cruel madness: the oblation of 
the sacrifice was interrupted, the sanctification of the chrism failed, 
and all the mysteries withdrew themselves from the murderous hands 
of the impious." — By these and other testimonies it seems estab- 
lished that the ecclesiastical sacraments, especially those of the body 
and blood, of ordination and confirmation, cannot be administered 
by heretics. 

But on the contrary others seem to think that holy orders can 
be given by heretics even when cut off from the Church, as can bap- 
tism, and that those who, having been ordained and baptized by 
heretics return to the Church from them, need not be again ordained 
or baptized. Wherefore Augustine^ : "What some say of condemned 
heretics : that one who leaves the Church does not lose the baptism 
which he has received but loses the power of giving what he has 
received; seems in many ways to be said foolishly: first, because no 
reason is shown why he who cannot lose his baptism can lose the 
power of giving it. For both are sacraments, and both are bestowed 
upon a man with consecration : the one when he is baptized, the other 
when he is ordained. Therefore neither sacrament can be repeated 
in the catholic Church. For when some who have been ofiicers 



1 Comment, in Aggaeum 2, 15; C. Sic populus (61.), ibid.; following pas- 
sage, in Amos 5, 22; C. Odit Deus (62.), ibid.; third, in Oseam 6, 7; C. Illi offerunt 
(63.), ibid. 

2 Ep. 80. (alias 60.) ad Anatolium, c. 2; C. In Ecclesia (68.), ibid.; following 
passage, Ep. 156. (alias 125.) ad Leonem, c. 5; C. Manifestum est (69.), ibid. 

3 Lib. II. contra epist. Parmeniani, c. 13. n. 28; C. Quod quidam (97.), ibid. 



238 APPENDIX 

in a sect come into the Church for the good of peace, and the 
correction of the error of schism is corrected, they are received, 
and even if it seem needful that they should fill the same office 
which they were administering before ; they are not to be ordained 
again; but as their baptism, so their ordination has remained 
unimpaired for the fault was in their cutting off from the Church, 
and this is corrected by the unity of peace, not in the sacra- 
ments, which, wherever they are, are the same. And when it seems 
expedient for the Church itself, that the officers of the heretics who 
come into the catholic society, should not there exercise their honors ; 
still the actual sacraments of ordination are not taken from them, but 
remain with them; therefore hands are not laid on them, lest injury 
should be done; not to the man, but to the sacrament itself. But as 
in baptism there is a right which can be given by them, so in ordina- 
tion there is a right to give, both to be sure to their own destruction. 
But it is one thing not to have a right, another to have it unto destruc- 
tion, and still another unto salvation." The same^ : "As for those 
who are separated from the unity of the Church, there is now no 
question but that they have and can give ; but they have unto destruc- 
tion, because they are outside the 'bond of peace.' Injury must not 
be done to either sacrament. Just as he does not have it rightly, if 
he withdraws from unity, but yet he has it, and therefore when he 
returns into unity it is not given to him again, so also he does not 
perform it rightly if he withdraws from unity and yet he performs 
it ; and therefore it is not repeated for one, who receives it from him, 
when he comes into the unity of the Church." The same : "It is one 
thing not to have something, it is another not to have it rightly or 
to exercise it unlawfully. But not on that account are they not sacra- 
ments of Christ and the Church, because not only heretics, but also 
all the impious, use them unlawfully; but they must be corrected 
and punished, and the sacraments must be recognized and venerated." 
Also Gregory^: "As to your saying that he who has been ordained 
should be ordained again, it is certainly ridiculous. For as one who 
is once baptized ought not be baptized again, so he who is once con- 
secrated, cannot be consecrated again to the same order." — From 

^ Ibid., and C. cit. § 6. See Eph. 4, 3. — Following passage from III. de 
Baptism© contra Donatist. c. 10. n. 13. 

2 Lib. II. Registr. indict. 10, epist. 46 (alias 22.) ad loan, episc. Ravennat.; 
C. Sicut semel (i.), d. 68. 



DISTINCTION XXV 239 

these and other authorities it seems that the sacraments of Christ 
with the power of performing them, remain with all the impious and 
even with heretics who are cut off and condemned ; for they are able 
to perform them, but to their own destruction, and those on whom 
they bestow them must not be ordained again. All of this seems 
to contradict the foregoing opinions on the other side. 

Now some explain these statements thus. For they say that 
heretics, who leave the Church after having received sacerdotal or 
episcopal unction, certainly retain the power of giving baptism, but 
have not the ability to impart holy Orders or to consecrate the 
Lord's body, after they are cut off and condemned by the Church,, 
just as a degraded bishop has not the power of bestowing holy 
Orders, yet he does not lose the ability to baptize. But as to the say- 
ing of Augustine, they understand it of heretics, who are cut off^. 
not by the sentence of the Church, but by the perversity of their 
understanding, from the truth of faith and the unity of doctrine; 
who, although they are in such condition yet have the power of 
ordination and consecration. And persons who are ordained by them 
before their manifest schism even if later they openly leave with 
them and are condemned by the sentence of the Church, yet if they 
return must not be ordained again. And they say we can understand 
in this way, whatever we read to the effect that persons ordained 
by heretics can minister, if they have observed their orders, and must 
not be ordained again. But they assert that after the persons are 
cut off and condemned by the judgment of the Church the power of 
ordaining and consecrating is taken from them, as from the degraded,, 
or excommunicated. — But others say that sacraments celebrated 
according to the rite of the Church, by heretics and persons cut off 
from unity, are true and valid, because when they left the Church 
they did not lose the power of ordaining and consecrating ; and per- 
sons who are thus ordained by heretics, when they return, must not 
be ordained again. But the sacraments which are performed by^ 
heretics otherwise than as they are performed in the Church, are 
false and invalid ; and persons who seem to be ordained by them, da 
not receive a gift but a wound. So following this difference of 
opinion, the doctors speak variously of these matters. But some 
sayi that the same sacraments can be celebrated by heretics cut off 



^ Cf. Gratian, on C. cit. Quod quidatn, § 5, 7. 



240 APPENDIX 

from the Church, as by Catholics, if the forms of the church are pre- 
served by them ; and the sacraments celebrated by them are true and 
valid in themselves, but they are false and invalid in their effects, 
both upon those who wickedly perform them and upon those who 
wickedly receive them, and therefore invalid and false, because what 
they promise and are believed to confer, they do not confer; more- 
over they are said to be condemned, because for those who unlaw- 
fully give and receive them, they are unto judgment; they are also 
called polluted, not so much for themselves, as on account of the 
unworthy performance of them by the heretics. Therefore Gregory 
calls the communion of Arius execration and Innocent the ordina- 
tion of Bonosius damnation; not because they are so in them- 
selves, but because they make those, who wickedly give or receive 
them, liable to damnation, as Jerome also calls their sacrifices 
the bread of lamentation, not so much for themselves as for their 
effect. — But some^ teach that those heretics who have been or- 
dained in the Church, have the power of ordaining and conse- 
crating, even when they are separated from it; but persons in 
schism or heresy who are ordained and anointed by them are with- 
out this power, and therefore when they wish to ordain, they 
rather inflict a wound than confer grace. 

II. Of simony, why it is so called, and what it is. 

And we must not doubt that simonists are heretics, though be- 
fore the sentence of degradation they both ordain and consecrate. 
And although they are properly called simonists who, like Simon 
Magus,2 wish to buy priceless grace for a price, and they who 
accept a price for their sacred ministry like Giezi,^ should be 
called Giezites; yet all, both those who give and those who accept 
are called simonists, and both are condemned by the same sentence. 

III. Of those who are ordained by simonists with their own 

knowledge, and who are not. 

However there is a difference between persons who are know- 
ingly ordained by simonists, and those who are ordained in igno- 



1 Cf. Gratian, on C. Per illicitam (3.), C. 9. q. i. 

2 Acts 8, 18. 

3 IV. Kings (II. Ki.), 5, 25 ff. 



DISTINCTION XXV 241 

ranee. 'Tor persons who suffered themselves to be consecrated or 
rather execrated, knowingly by simonists have a consecration entirely 
invalid. But the ordination of persons who were ordained by simon- 
ists whom they did not know to be simonists when they were or- 
dained by them, and whom they then supposed to be Catholics, is 
confirmed out of mercy." ^ 

IV. Of those persons who say that they buy corporeal things, not 

spiritual, 

"But if some object that they are not buying consecrations, but 
only the things which follow from consecration; they prove them- 
selves altogether foolish. For whoever sells one thing, without 
which the other cannot be had, fails to sell either." 2 

V. Of the divisions of the simonists. 

Now the divisions of simoniacal heresy are three-fold. For 
some persons are ordained simoniacally by simonists; others simo- 
niacally by men who are not simonists, others not simoniacally by 
simonists. Wherefore Pope Nicholas^ : "We have established the 
decree concerning the three-fold heresy of simony that is, concerning 
those simonists who ordain or are ordained simoniacally and con- 
cerning simonists simoniacally ordained by persons not simonists, 
and concerning simonists ordained by simonists but not simoniacally. 
Simonists simoniacally ordained or ordaining, shall be deposed from 
their own rank, according to the canons. Also simonists simoniacally 
ordained by persons not simonists, shall be similarly removed from 
office. But simonists not simoniacally ordained by simonists we 
mercifully permit to remain in office with the laying-on of hands, on 
account of the necessity of the season." "This must be understood 
of persons ordained by simonists, when ignorant that they are simon- 
ists. Not the guilt of the offence makes them simonists, but the 
ordination by a simonist." 



^ Can. Si qui a simoniacis (108.), C. i. q. i. 

2 Can. Si quis obiecerit (7.), C. i. q. 3. 

3 Can. Statuimus decretum (107.), C. i. q. i. Following passage, ibid, and 
Gratian on this canon. 



242 APPENDIX 

VI. Of persons who are forcibly ordained by simonists or by her- 
etics. 

We must understand in the same way the judgment of Pope 
Alexander,^ that "Simonists must be entirely condemned and de- 
posed: unless the man was forcibly compelled to it. For of such 
persons, and also of persons forcibly ordained by heretics, Innocent 
says that they can have some color of excuse, if they leave imme- 
diately, and renounce the accursed place of assembly." 

As for the age of persons to be ordained Pope Nicholas has 
decreed^ : "The holy canons, he says, have established that a sub- 
deacon should not be ordained before he is fourteen years of age, nor 
a deacon before twenty-five, nor a priest before thirty. Then, if the 
man is worthy, he can be elected to the episcopate" ; this rule we also 
command to be observed in like manner. Also Fabian: "If a man 
has not completed thirty years of age, he shall not be ordained priest, 
even if he is entirely worthy"; "because the Lord himself was 
baptized at thirty years of age, and then began to teach." 



* Gathered from C. Erga simoniacos (i lo.), ibid, and C. Constat multos (i 1 1.), 
ibid., and Gratian, ibid. 

2 Can. In singulis gradibus (2.), d. 77; Hugh, II. de Sacram. p. III. c. 21. 
Following passage is C. Si quis triginta (i.), d. 78. The last words are in C. 
Presbyter (4.), ibid.; see Luke 3, 21 ff. 

A new rule for the age of candidates for ordination was passed by the Coun- 
cil of Trent (Sess. XXIII. de Reform.). — ^Twenty-two is the age for sub-deacons, 
twenty-three for deacons, and twenty-five for priests. 



Distinction XXVI 

I. Of the sacrament of marriage. 

"Although the other sacraments took their rise after sin and on 
account of sin, we read that the sacrament of marriage was insti- 
tuted by the Lord even before sin, yet not as a remedy, but as a 
duty." ^ For the Scripture relates in Genesis that a sleep was sent 
upon Adam and one of his ribs was taken, and from it a woman 
formed, and that the man understanding in spirit for what purpose 
the woman was made, said prophetically after his trance: "This is 
now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh ; for this reason shall a 
man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife,, 
and they shall be two in one flesh." 

II. Of its institution and purpose. 

Now the institution of marriage is two-fold : one was instituted 
before sin in paradise as a duty, that there might be a blameless 
couch and honorable nuptials^ ; as a result of which they might con- 
ceive without passion and bring forth without pain; the other was 
instituted after sin outside paradise for a remedy, to prevent unlaw- 
ful desires; the first, that nature might be multiplied; the second, 
that nature might be protected, and sin repressed. For even before 
sin God said : "Increase and multiply" ^ ; and again after sin, when 
most men had been destroyed by the Deluge.^ But Augustine testi- 
fies^ that before sin marriage was instituted for a duty, and after 
sin allowed for a remedy, when he says: "What is a duty for the 
sound is a remedy for the sick." For the infirmity of incontinence 
which exists in the flesh that is dead through sin, is protected by 
honorable marriage lest it fall into the ruin of vice. If the first men 
had not sinned, they and their descendants would have united with- 



^ Hugh of St. Victor, II. de Sacram. p. XI. c. i ; from the same what follows 
is also taken. See Gen. 2, 21. 23. 24. 

2 Heb. 13, 4. Gratian on C. Sicui non omnis (2.), C. 32. q. 2. 

3 Gen. I, 28. 
^ Gen. 9, I. 

5 Super Gen. ad lit. lib. IX. c. 7. n. 12. At the end of the chapter see Rom.. 
7, 15- 23. 

243 



244 APPENDIX 

out the incentive of the flesh and the heat of passion; and as any 
good deed deserves reward, so their union would have been good 
and worthy of reward. But because on account of sin the law of 
deadly concupiscence has beset our members, without which there 
is no carnal union, an evil union is reprehensible unless it be ex- 
cused by the blessings of marriage. 

III. When marriage was contracted by command and when by 

permission. 

The first institution was commanded, the second permitted. 
For we learn from the Apostle,^ that marriage was permitted to the 
human race for the purpose of preventing fornication. But this 
permission, because it does not select better things, is a remedy, not 
a reward; if anyone rejects it, he will deserve judgment of death. 
An act which is allowed by permission is voluntary, not necessary; 
otherwise the one who did not do it would be a transgressor. And 
we can rightly understand that it was said to the first men as a com- 
mand before sin : "Increase and multiply" ; and they were bound by 
the command even after sin, until the multiplication was achieved, 
after which marriage was contracted by permission. So after the 
deluge when nearly the whole human race was wiped out, the sons 
of Noah were commanded : "Increase and multiply" ; but when man 
had multiplied, marriage was contracted by permission, not by com- 
mand. 

IV. In what ways the permission should be received. 

Now permission is received in various ways, as concession, as 
remission, as toleration. And there is toleration in the New Testa- 
ment, for lesser good deeds and lesser evils ; among the lesser good 
deeds is marriage, which does not deserve a palm, but is a remedy; 
among the lesser evils, that is, the venial ones, is a union which is 
due to incontinency. For such a marriage is permitted, that is, is 
allowed ; and such a marriage, that is such a union, is tolerated, that 
is suffered, in so far as it is not forbidden. 

V. That marriage is good. 

Now there have been some heretics who denounced marriage, 

1 1. Cor. 7, 6. 



DISTINCTION XXVI 245 

who were called Tatians.^ "These condemn marriage altogether^ 
and make it equal to fornication and other corruptions, and they 
do not receive into their number any male or female living in mar- 
riage.'* "But that marriage is good^ is proved not only by the fact 
that we read that the Lord instituted marriage between our first 
parents, but also that Christ was present at a marriage in Cana of 
Galilee and commended it by a miracle, changing the water into 
wine; and that afterwards he forbade a man to put away his wife, 
save for the cause of fornication. The Apostle also says: 'A 
virgin does not sin if she marries/ It is therefore clear that marriage 
is a good thing," otherwise it would not be a sacrament; for a sacra- 
ment is a sacred sign. 

VI. Of what thing marriage is a sacrament. 

Since therefore marriage is a sacrament, it is also a sacred sign 
and of a sacred thing, namely, of the union of Christ and the Church, 
as the Apostle says^ : It is written, he says : "A man shall leave 
father and mother and shall cleave to his wife, and they shall be two 
in one flesh. This is a great sacrament, but I speak of Christ and 
of the Church." For as between husband and wife there is union in 
the harmony of their spirits and in the joining of their bodies, so the 
Church is joined to Christ by will and nature in that she wills 
the same as he, and that he himself assumed the form of the nature 
of man. Therefore the bride is united to the bridegroom spiritually 
and physically, that is by love and by a conformity to nature. And 
the symbol of both these unions is in marriage; for the harmony of 
the husband and wife signifies the spiritual union of Christ and the 
Church which takes place through love; and the union of the sexes 
signifies the union which takes place through a conformity to nature. 

Hence it is that some doctors have said that a woman does not 
tjelong in marriage who does not know union in the flesh. For 
Augustine says^ : "There is no doubt that a woman does not belong 



^ August., de Haeresibus, c. 25. 

2 Ibid. 

3 Sum. Sent. tr. 7. c. 2. See Gen. 2, 24, and John 2, 2 ff., then Matt. 5, 32; 
19, 9; and finally I. Cor. 7, 36. 

* Eph. 5, 31. 32. 

6 Not found in Augustine; Gratian, C. Non est dubium (16,); and also it is 
the continuation of the second passage, (that from Pope Leo). 



246 APPENDIX 

in marriage, in whose case it is shown that there has been no sexual 
union." Also Pope Leo^ : "Since the bond of marriage was so insti- 
tuted from the beginning that without sexual union it does not con- 
tain the sacrament of Christ and the Church ; there is not doubt that 
a woman does not belong in marriage in whose case it is shown that 
there has been no mystery of marriage." Also Augustine^ : "Mar- 
riage is not complete without sexual union." — If one accepts this 
according to the superficial meaning of the words, he is led into 
such error as to say that without carnal union, matrimony cannot be 
contracted, and that there was no marriage between Mary and 
Joseph, or that it was not perfect; to think which is a sin. For it 
was the more holy and perfect, as it was the more free from carnal 
acts. But the passages above are to be understood in this way, not 
that a woman does not belong in marriage, in whose case there is no 
sexual union ; but that she does not belong in a marriage which con- 
tains the express and full symbol of the union of Christ and the 
Church. For her marriage represents the union of Christ and the 
Church, which is in love, but not that which is in a conformity to 
nature. There is therefore in her marriage a type of the union of 
Christ and the Church, but only of that union in which the Church 
is united to Christ by love, not of that in which through Christ's 
assumption of the flesh the members are joined to the head ; but her 
marriage is not for that reason less holy, because as Augustine 
says,3 "in marriage the sanctity of the sacrament is more important 
than the fruitfulness of the womb." Marriage is also a sign of the 
spiritual union and affection of souls, by which husbands and wives 
ought to be united. Wherefore the Apostle says* : "Husbands, love 
your wives as your own bodies." 



1 Ep. 167. (alias 2.) ad Rustic, inquisit. 4; Gratian, C. Cum societas, C. 27. 
q. 2. and on C. Sufficiat (2.), ibid. 
' I. Soliloq. c. 10. n. 17. 
' De Bono coniugal. c. 18. n. 21. 
* Eph. 5, 25. 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 

In addition to the works mentioned below, articles of import- 
ance may be found in some of the recent encyclopaedias, in many 
cases written by specialists, and in some by scholars of the very 
first rank. Among these may be mentioned the article Sacraments, 
(D. J. Kennedy) in the Catholic Encyclopaedia; the article Euchar- 
ist in the Middle Ages (J. H. Srawley) in the Encyclopaedia of 
Religion and Ethics; and Sakrament (F. Kattenbusch) in the Realen- 
cyklopadie fiir protestantische Theologie und Kirche. 

Baltzer, Otto. Die Sentenzen des Petrus Lombardus. Ihre 
Quellen und ihre dogmengeschichtliche Bedeutung. Studien zur 
Geschichte der Theologie und der Kirche. 8 Bd. Heft 3. Leipzig. 
1902. viii, 164 pp. 

The most complete and exhaustive discussion of the sources. 

Bouuaert, P. Claeys, S. J. La Summa Sententiarum, appartient- 
elle a Hugues de Saint- Victor ? Revue d'histoire ecclesiastique. X, 
1909. Pp. 278-279, 710-719. 

Chefdebien, Roch de. Une attribution contestee: La "Summa 

Sententiarum" de Hugues de Saint-Victor. Revue Augustinienne. 

XII. 1908. Paris. Pp. 529-560. 

This and the above are two important contributions to the contro- 
versy over the authorship of the "Summa Sententiarum." 

Conybeare, Frederick Cornwallis. Myth, Magic and Morals ; a 
Study of Christian origins. London. 1909. xviii, 376 pp. 

Denifle, P. Heinrich, O. P. Die Senten^n Abaelards und die 
Bearbeitungen seiner Theologia vor Mitte des^ 12. Jhs. Archiv fiir 
Litteratur- und Kirchengeschichte des Mittelalters. I. 1885. Berlin. 
Pp. 402-469, 584-624. 

Denifle, P. Heinrich, O. P. Die Sentenzen Hugos von St. Victor. 
Archiv fiir Litteratur- und Kirchengeschichte des Mittelalters. III. 
1887. Berlin. Pp. 634-640. 

Fournier, Paul. Deux controverses sur les origines du decret 
de Gratien. Revue d'histoire et de litterature religieuses. III. 1898. 
Paris. Pp. 97-116, 253-280. 

Very important for the discussion of the dates of Gratian's and the 
Lombard's books. 

247 



248 APPENDIX 

Ghellinck, J. de, S. J. A propos de quelques affirmations du 
nombre septenaire des sacraments au Xlle siecle. Recherches de 
science religieuse. I. Paris. 1910. Pp. 493-497. 

Showing that the Lombard was not the first to give the number 
of the sacraments as seven. 

Ghellinck, J. de, S. J. Le mouvement theologique du Xlle 
siecle, etudes, recherches et documents, fitudes d'histoire des 
dogmes et d'ancienne litterature ecclesiastique. Paris. 1914. ixy 
409 pp. 

The most important book for the Lombard's period. 

Ghellinck, J. de, S. J. Le Traite de Pierre Lombard sur les 
sept ordres ecclesiastiques : ses sources, ses copistes. Revue d'his- 
toire ecclesiastique. X. 1909. Pp. 290-302, 720-728; XL 1910. 
Pp. 29-46. 

Ghellinck, J. de, S. J. Mediaeval Theology : a few notes on its 
early history. The American Catholic Quarterly Review. XXXIIL 
Jan. to Oct. 1908. Philadelphia. Pp. 534-564. 

Ghellinck, J. de, S. J. The Liber Sententiarum. The Dublin 
Review. CXLVI. Jan. and April, 1910. London. Pp. 139-166. 

The best summary of the subject. Most of this is reprinted in "Le 
mouvement theologique" cited above. 

Gietl, P. Fr. Ambrosius M., O. Pr. Die Sentenzen Rolands 
nachmals Papstes Alexander IIL Freiburg in Breisgau. 1891. 

Goetz, K. G. Die heutige Abendmahlsfrage in ihrer geschicht- 
lichen Entwicklung. Leipzig. 1907. viii, 311 pp. 

An excellent summary of the entire Eucharistic controversy. 

Gore, Charles. Dissertations on Subjects connected with the 
Incarnation. New York. 

Hagenbach, K. R. History of Doctrines. 2 vols. 1869. 

Valuable, if somewhat antiquated, owing to citations from the 
sources. 

Hahn, G. L. Die Lehre von den Sakramenten in ihrer ge- 
schichtlichen Entwickelung innerhalb der abendlandischen Kirche 
bis zum Concil von Trient. Breslau. 1864. viii, 447 pp. 

Harnack, Adolph. History of Dogma, (translated from third 
German edition by Neil Buchanan.) Boston. 1897. 7 vols. 

Hatch, Edwin. The Influence of Greek Ideas and Usages upon 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 249 

the Christian Church, (edited by A. M. Fairbairn). London and 
Edinburgh. 1890. xxiii, 359 pp. 

Epoch-making in its day. Suggestive but superseded. 

Lea, Henry Charles. A History of Auricular Confession and 
Indulgences in the Latin Church. Philadelphia. 1896. 3 vols. 

Of value in this field for its survey of the sources through the early 
Middle Ages. Some conclusions open to controversy. 

Lightfoot, J. B. The Apostolic Fathers. London and New- 
York. 1890. (2d edition). Vol.1, xii, 496 pp. 

McCabe, Joseph. St. Augustine and his age. London. 1903. 
vii, 516 pp. 

McCabe, Joseph. Peter Abelard. New York, 1901. vii, 402 pp. 

Mignon, A. Les Origines de la Scholastique et Hugues de 
Saint- Victor. Paris. 1895. 2 vols. 

Miiller, Karl. Der Umschwung in der Lehre von der Busse 
wahrend des 12 ten Jahrhunderts. Theologische Abhandlungen. 
Freiburg in Breisgau. 1892. Pp. 287-320. 

O'Brien, Rev. John. A History of the Mass and its Ceremonies 
in the Eastern and Western Church. (14th edition, revised.) New 
York. 1893. xxiii, 414 pp. 

Poole, Reginald Lane. Illustrations of the History of Mediaeval 
Thought in the Departments of Theology and Ecclesiastical Politics. 
London, 1884. viii, 376 pp. 

Good on John Scotus Erigena. 

Protois, F. Pierre Lombard, fiveque de Paris, dit le Maitre des 
Sentences; son epoque, sa vie, ses ecrits, son influence. Paris. 1881. 
198 pp. 

The most complete account of Peter Lombard's life, and a discus- 
sion of the legends concerning it. 

Poukens, J. B. Sacramentum dans les oeuvres de Saint Cyprien. 
6tude lexicographique. Bulletin d'ancienne litterature et d'archeo- 
logie chretiennes. Oct. 1912. 

Reville, Albert. Du sens du mot sacramentum dans Tertullien. 
ificole pratique des hautes etudes — Section des Sciences religieuses. 
Etudes de critique et d'histoire. Paris. 1889. I. Pp. 195-204. 

The two articles named above give an exhaustive treatment of the 
early theological use of the term sacramentum. 



^50 APPENDIX 

Schanz, P. von. Der Begriff des Sakramentes bei den Vatern. 
Theologische Quartalschrift. Tubingen. 1891. Pp. 529-576. 

Schanz, P. von. Die Kirche und die Sakramente. Theolo- 
igische Quartalschrift. Tiibingen. 1891. Pp. 3-67. 

SchmoU, P. Polykarp, O. F. M. Die Busslehre der Fruh- 
scholastik. Eine dogmengeschichtliche Untersuchung. Miinchen, 
1909. xvi, 163 pp. 

Seeberg, Reinhold. Text-book of the History of Doctrines. 
Revised, 1904, by the author. Translated by Charles E. Hay. 
Philadelphia. 1905. 2 vols. 

Sodem, Hans von. MvoTTJpiov und sacramentum in den ersten 
zwei Jahrhunderten der Kirche. Zeitschrift fiir die neutestament- 
liche Wissenschaft. XII. 191 1. Giessen. Pp. 189-226. 

Sohm, Rudolph. Kirchenrecht. Systematisches Handbuch der 
deutschen Rechts wissenschaft. 8te Abtheilung, erster Band. Leip- 
zig. 1892. xxiii, 700 pp. 

Emphasizes the sacramental basis of the ecclesiastical structure. 



VITA 

Elizabeth Frances Rogers, born June 29, 1892, in Philadel- 
phia, Pa. Graduated, Public High School, Madison, New Jersey, 
1907. B.A., Goucher College, 1912. M.A., Columbia University, 
19 13. Studiosus philosophiae, University of Bern, Switzerland, 
1913-1914. Ph.D. candidate, Columbia University, 1914-1916. 



yjh 



o O 



\ 



\ 






-^ 



\ 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Feb. 2006 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Dnve 
Cranberry Toivnship, PA 16066 
, (724)779-2111 



8 



10 



6 



7 



8 ^ 



9 ^ 



10^ 



83 



85 



84 



87 



86 



89 



91 



88 



90 



llj 



lEGON RULE CO, 



U.S.A. 



3 4 ■ 5 



